@mittorn@masturbated.one avatar

mittorn

@mittorn@masturbated.one

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

drq, to random
@drq@mastodon.ml avatar

Alright, I've been thinking. As we know, the default model of conversation on the Fediverse is a tree. Threads are directed graphs, each node is allowed multiple children and only one parent. Kinda like a filesystem. There are also (hash-)tags, but they are a bit meta and work across all conversations.

What if we upgrade it a little bit? What if we allow multiple parents to each node? What if you can reply to multiple posts? I miss this feature because sometimes, when I post something, I get similar replies from different people, and I'm forced to either answer both of them (which sucks, because duplication of effort) or reply to only one and leave all others unanswered, which spawns an offshoot conversation that is basically already over. This way, conversation may feel more like putting out little fires at times. So, instead I can just add all of those in one reply, and add more as they appear.

And it's not that hard to do. Just make in-reply-to a list, not a string.

mittorn,
@mittorn@masturbated.one avatar

@skobkin @drq This is strange. I using VK, which has same mechanics in messages: you can forward multiple messages, it is not direct reply and even does not notify sender, but it allows:
Citate other user's message, keeping all attachments groupped in this message, not randomly placed after it, usual citation cannot do this.
Other users may be sure that original message was sent by user, not "fake citate" and see original send time. Even if they have no rights to see original message.
And this is integrated feature, not some user-formatted citate which may differ in syntax or visual representation.
And i very missing this feature in all messengers. Yes, there is message forward in telegram, but it does not allow to make commentary, only forwards original message like repost.
In fediverse that might be very useful because you may mention message auhor anyway. Also it should keep all attachments, text, format, etc.. not respecting local instance limits to be useful. Not sure it may be implemented in mastodon...

mittorn,
@mittorn@masturbated.one avatar

@skobkin @drq Yes, but it's more useful. Also you can mention authors in forwards, allowing continue this topic in new thread or subthread.
In same time, making "multi-reply-to" will allow connect two unconnected before threads. This really not useful and hard to implement. I even do not know how we should show such thread in UI/UX.

mittorn,
@mittorn@masturbated.one avatar

@drq @skobkin you want ddos servers? Or make @matrix.org analog in fedi?

mittorn,
@mittorn@masturbated.one avatar

@drq @skobkin really, if you want to answer to multiple posts, you need break graph connection and build new. This helps keep implementation and UX simple, but with same abilities. Maybe we ability to embed "link" not to post, but to thread. Not usually url, but some reference. So starting new thread and posting reference to old thread will make it as separate "subthread" which does not embed to original thread, but opens separately. In this case we will not have loops or stranges in UX.

mittorn,
@mittorn@masturbated.one avatar

@drq @BigFoxBoss but in case you "multi-reply" and we filter loops, only one of messages will get reply. Otherwise we have 2 identical branches in thread (loop). This breaks structure at all

mittorn,
@mittorn@masturbated.one avatar

@drq @mo @BigFoxBoss Upgrade without keeping compatibility is breakage

mittorn,
@mittorn@masturbated.one avatar

@drq @mo @BigFoxBoss Yes, we need "secondary link" semantics, not this shit. For me this opens MML in separate tab, very useful. And thankful, that is not some misskey

mittorn,
@mittorn@masturbated.one avatar

@drq @mo @BigFoxBoss so we need tooling for this, not multireply

mittorn,
@mittorn@masturbated.one avatar

@drq @mo @BigFoxBoss no, multireply is shit and we already described why:

  1. This makes loop issuse and solving it we break connections between posts
  2. This will break existing clients even if allowed by AP/AS, because it was ported to json-ld not best way. Ideally, all implementations should handle all fields as array if it is array or array of one element if it's single element. Same semantics everywhere. But existing json libs not developed for such usage.
  3. This is bad UX. User do not want BIIIG complex graphs.
  4. This makes new ways to break threads and ddos servers just by connecting hellthreads to small threads and connecing big helltheads to single one.
mittorn,
@mittorn@masturbated.one avatar

@drq @mo @BigFoxBoss
1.PolyTree here will create only one junction point and drop all other. What you will do if this dropping will be in other place, not you want?
2. I dont care physics/mathematics, i just want...
3. Do you even have an idea, how to add multiple messages as reply source for user? Anyway, it's complicated
4. Maybe it allow omit some duplicate messages in thread, but this is not very much, only about 5-10%. Discussion moves and thread grows anyway.
But this will allow to kill any thread by joining something big to it...

mittorn,
@mittorn@masturbated.one avatar

@drq @mo @BigFoxBoss ok, as you want you answer show multiple times, this could be rendered as reply, but with link to another thread point with first reply source, instead of rendering all children. That duplication will allow keep consistency and even work with "polytree" model.
But in that case only one reply source will be rendered, other only referenced
And this will not show single thread as "Polytree", there will be 2 separate threads, but with "weak" junction point, so all next replies will go to thread, where first reply source was

mittorn,
@mittorn@masturbated.one avatar

@drq @mo @BigFoxBoss

  1. When you replying to post in this thread, this is not tree or polytree, just looped graph. To make polytree you need break loop, losing connection
  2. Unlikely, very unlikely. Just because of technical solutions in implementations. It's more, more safe to send second and next replies in separate fields. This will just work with current implementations.
  3. ok, that is possible way to compose such message. I suggesting here specify if we should show reply copy here or just embed it as forward (with link to original) so we may avoid flooding when do not want extra reply to be shown
  4. Connecting many threads with different ideas may produce even more dramas. But if it will be secondary replies, not showing whole thread (not connecting it techincaly, not mergin replies and leaving visual split between threads), then ok.
mittorn,
@mittorn@masturbated.one avatar

@drq @mo @BigFoxBoss

  1. Here you posting link to other posts in THIS thread. So if you make this like multy-reply, it will be loop, not polytree. Even if it not looped really, this means rendering 2 same branches. Both is useless.
    We need hard-break or soft-break this. I suggested ideas how it may be done, but this means not multy reply, but one reply and junction points. Only render first branch, second just link, junction point.
  2. Do you really want break just working thing? Maybe we do not need AP at all, but you know, if we break what works now, then it will be very hard to build community again in this world when everybody get addicted to whatsapp/tiktok/etc. And you know how this addiction is strong. And again, all might be done without breakage using extension. JSON-LD is pain of AP, but this is not catastrophe and may be worked around in way, compatible with all implementations.
mittorn,
@mittorn@masturbated.one avatar

@drq @BigFoxBoss @mo we do not have such amount of moderation. Why add potentially harmful features? Or you want use some AI for moderation like big corps?

mittorn,
@mittorn@masturbated.one avatar

@drq @BigFoxBoss @mo so you just need reference tool, not multi-reply

mittorn,
@mittorn@masturbated.one avatar

@drq @BigFoxBoss @mo you asked for multiple entities in replyTo, not references and said that you do not want references (i do not want to search this post in so big thread now)

mittorn,
@mittorn@masturbated.one avatar

@drq @BigFoxBoss @mo but it is not just a reference, but graph connection. And you asked to use not just single-root directional tree, so you wanted to change main graph

mittorn,
@mittorn@masturbated.one avatar

@drq @BigFoxBoss @mo it is not just a reference, it is point by which user finds the thread and gets notifications and replies

mittorn,
@mittorn@masturbated.one avatar

@drq @BigFoxBoss @mo but we use this references to build the thread. So changing it's semantic will change thread structure with all issues we discussed above

mittorn,
@mittorn@masturbated.one avatar

@iliazeus @drq
https://mastodon.ml/@drq/112525201937496453
here (point 3).
Also we may add ability to select what want to do, reply with mention or just forward/citation

mittorn,
@mittorn@masturbated.one avatar

@iliazeus @drq i suggested idea here: secondary answer not shows as regular post with thread, but mark "also answered in" with link to post under first reply source.
Also, optionally we may draw this post's contens (but not other replies). Clicking to the post will jump to thread point, where first "reply to" was and loads thread if it's another thread.
But this allow user to create many such replies, flooding notifications, many separate posts. Very useful for spamming/flooding.

mittorn,
@mittorn@masturbated.one avatar

@drq @BigFoxBoss @mo but really, fedi is not notekeeping. Even messenger is, but not fedi.
This is because i can search messenger history as linear timeline, but searching fedi timeline is almost impossible. And very sparse federation makes it even more difficult. No, fedi is just conversation now, not notekeeping. Instances dying, instances bans scrappers, fedi users often deletes account (or it's gets deleted somehow due to bug in implementation)
And some users do not want data left after account deleted. No, it is completely not about notekeeping...

mittorn,
@mittorn@masturbated.one avatar

@drq @BigFoxBoss @mo blog != microblog

mittorn,
@mittorn@masturbated.one avatar

@BigFoxBoss @drq @mo blog is similar to news article, microblog is similar to comments under it.
Differense is user have dedicated time to make big blog post v.s user just reading something and want to insert it's point in comments or post some meme.
But microblog does not have initial theme to comment, it is made by same comment

mittorn,
@mittorn@masturbated.one avatar

@drq i think, activity/json objects may be easily adopted like file structure. But what to do with paginated timelines? Fetch all?

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • JUstTest
  • ngwrru68w68
  • everett
  • InstantRegret
  • magazineikmin
  • thenastyranch
  • rosin
  • GTA5RPClips
  • Durango
  • Youngstown
  • slotface
  • khanakhh
  • kavyap
  • DreamBathrooms
  • provamag3
  • ethstaker
  • osvaldo12
  • tester
  • cubers
  • cisconetworking
  • mdbf
  • tacticalgear
  • modclub
  • Leos
  • anitta
  • normalnudes
  • megavids
  • lostlight
  • All magazines