If it's not an issue currently, then that's even better ๐
At least on NodeBB we only post to one community, but it'd still happen even if other communities on other instances were mentioned first, so it could still be abused.
E.g. mention four communities on four different instances, get posted to four communities.
lmfao okay, now will you accept that BlueSky is de facto not federated, or do you consider BlackSky (which isn't fully divorced from the BlueSky network mind you) to be the lone data point that proves the principle?
I've been looking into how to accomplish this too... because it is a UI/UX problem and I am very bad at designing user interfaces.
Mixing them like so works, although it's hard because then it minimizes the size of topics (since it is just the title.) It means microblog content get a bit of a UI boost due to on screen size.
Limiting the max height of microblog posts and showing a snippet of the threaded content OP is another way, but that makes the page more feed-like and less of a "topic listing", which isn't always the way to go either.
For reference, NodeBB also mixes threads and microblog posts. We do this by generating a title from microblog posts. It's not the best solution either.
auster@thebrainbin.org may I ask you to expand in what you mean by "underlying engine"?
If you're talking about ActivityPub then it's a open standard which isn't beholden to any one organization. It's like saying HTML is bad because websites are all forced to use it as the underlying engine.
I personally feel that the technical and mental overhead of maintaining a bridge is much worse than the overhead of a slowly changing standard. What if there are bridges for 20 different protocols, 200? When does it get unwieldy?
There is, but I am not sold on giving up entirely on the idea simply because disparate communities might not want to talk to another.
I agree that treading lightly is paramount, but the benefits of cross-community interaction could very much be worth it!
One thing is for sure: making this an opt-out is not the way forward.
What if upon cross-posting the default is separation, but a request is sent to the original community to request a comment tree merge?
Then you don't have to share comment space with the tankies unless you wish it
That's one of the issues that need to be worked through. It's a totally legitimate concern.
In cases where communities with polarising viewpoints discuss the same topic, it would lead to inter-community disputes and exacerbate some instance relationships.
One solution would be to have the original community be responsible for moderation, and moderation actions from cross-posted communities only affect their "view", so to speak.
I don't know what the answer is quite yet.
Hmm... that's nice, but the comments are still separated.
It would be better if the separate reply chains were integrated but I know there are potential issues that need to be thought through.
blaze@piefed.zip said in The problem of cross-community posting: > That's a complete overhaul compared to what Lemmy/PieFed/Mbin are doing now.
That might be the case, but it really depends on how the backend is structured. Are the posts and communities so strictly structured that a post cannot be a part of multiple communities? (rimu@piefed.social just pinging you about this)
In NodeBB categories and topics are all distinct elements, and the fact that a topic belongs in a category is contrived. A topic could be part of a user (pinned topics anyone?), a group (group only conversations?), or in this case... multiple categories.
Yup. This is how NodeBB does it, and why cross posting will work with less of an overhaul.
Yes. It is being worked on, and you are not far off.
Respondents here have mentioned that Piefed and Lemmy list cross-posts in places, sometimes in the community listing, sometimes in the post itself.
That's missing the point, which is that the conversations should be combined.
Take it a step further, though. You shouldn't have to combine posts, they should all be the same post.
So how do we get there? Both Piefed and Lemmy do this internally, and don't expose this to other instances. NodeBB (aka me) is hoping to explore this question and put in the protocol research to make this a reality. I'll be working together with members of the Forum and Threaded Discussions Working Group about these things. (forum-wg@community.nodebb.org)
The issue (as usual) is buy-in from Lemmy and Piefed (and don't forget mbin!) We all have to move in lockstep so that nobody gets left behind.
We've only just started discussions on how this might work, but hopefully we'll be able to make this a reality soon.
silverpill@mitra.social isn't wrong though, in many cases the posts do mean to be posted in that community.
But it's an expressive thing. I'm able to mention a community like startrek@startrek.website and it won't be posted there, because I'm only mentioning that community.
And yes, Mastodon needs mention spam to function because otherwise people you reply to won't know they received a reply. It's ... an approach.