Skip to content

Piero Bosio Social Web Site Personale Logo Fediverso

Social Forum federato con il resto del mondo. Non contano le istanze, contano le persone

The problem of cross-community posting

Fediverse
56 23 120
  • Fediverse projects are maturing and adoption of them is trending up. I'm excited for the further development of the underlying technologies as well as the apps being built to leverage those technologies into even more integrated, user-friendly experiences.

    With any developing tech, small annoyances are found and ultimately patched or worked around. It's to be expected that no user experience is ever perfect, even for matured ecosystems. Typically, some smaller annoyances are tolerated when balanced with the overall utility and usefulness of the tech.

    One of the issues I've noticed (and I'm sure I'm not the first or only), is that when posts are relevant enough that the OP decides to cross-post into multiple communities, the comments and engagement stays with each community post leading to separate conversations.

    The existance of separate conversations itself isn't necessarily a bad thing. Maybe you post a recipe for Pot Roast in a general cooking community and also a community that helps refine recipes to improve them. It may be that the two separate conversations make more sense as the nature of discourse is focused on two different aspects of the content posted. If they were combined, it would be more difficult to sift through chatter to get at the discussion you were looking for.

    This concept is true for different communities as well as different instances. Maybe the Pot Roast recipe conversation generated on lemmy.carnivores is substantly different from the conversation at lemmy.vegan-curious and the existance of both is bolstered by the cultures and seneabilities of the different instance/communities. That could create usefull and/or thoughtful discourse that maybe wouldn't have happened if everyone was mixed together and talking past each other.

    However, there are plenty of informative posts attached to very similar communities on a given instance as well as posted to mirror-communities across separate instances. Each individual post is a separate entity and i find myself jumping in to different conversations of the same content to see what's being said in each. In addition to general replies often asking the same questions across all of the posts, unique engagement is diffuse and not connecting.

    I imagine that an OP would have trouble keeping up with all of these different interactions and likely defaulting to paying their attention to only one or two while the remaining posts are left to fend for themselves. Even if the OP stayed on top of them all, I assume they'd often have to answer the same questions multiple times.

    _The question I pose is: _

    What is the solution to myriad and diffuse conversations around cross-posts? Is there a way to handle this situation thru lemmy-ettiquette or does it require a technological solution?

    Maybe we handle it thru culture and expectation. If the decided upon method was to post once and then link that post to other communities for exposure, maybe that funnels everyone into one post to interact (when that's what OP wants).

    Is there a software solution on the app developer level that combines like posts together? Is it a protocol level solution thats required? Maybe something that allows a single post to essentially 'tag' different communities for exposure, while only posting once? Can we associate posts to an individual user rather than associating the post to a community, so all replies come to the user post rather than in a community?

    I don't know what the solution looks like and I'm not savvy enough to understand the protocol/software side to know if any of my examples are realistic. I also don't know if this is an issue for anyone else, or at least one that lemmy-ites actuallly care about enough to try and solve.

    Does anyone know if work is being done to address this? Am I focusing on something that is simply not a priority? I welcome your thoughts.

    ...I tried to choose what I thought was the best place for this post, but I'm open to moving it if I was in error. (Ironically, something that might be easier if posts were handled differently). :)

  • Fediverse projects are maturing and adoption of them is trending up. I'm excited for the further development of the underlying technologies as well as the apps being built to leverage those technologies into even more integrated, user-friendly experiences.

    With any developing tech, small annoyances are found and ultimately patched or worked around. It's to be expected that no user experience is ever perfect, even for matured ecosystems. Typically, some smaller annoyances are tolerated when balanced with the overall utility and usefulness of the tech.

    One of the issues I've noticed (and I'm sure I'm not the first or only), is that when posts are relevant enough that the OP decides to cross-post into multiple communities, the comments and engagement stays with each community post leading to separate conversations.

    The existance of separate conversations itself isn't necessarily a bad thing. Maybe you post a recipe for Pot Roast in a general cooking community and also a community that helps refine recipes to improve them. It may be that the two separate conversations make more sense as the nature of discourse is focused on two different aspects of the content posted. If they were combined, it would be more difficult to sift through chatter to get at the discussion you were looking for.

    This concept is true for different communities as well as different instances. Maybe the Pot Roast recipe conversation generated on lemmy.carnivores is substantly different from the conversation at lemmy.vegan-curious and the existance of both is bolstered by the cultures and seneabilities of the different instance/communities. That could create usefull and/or thoughtful discourse that maybe wouldn't have happened if everyone was mixed together and talking past each other.

    However, there are plenty of informative posts attached to very similar communities on a given instance as well as posted to mirror-communities across separate instances. Each individual post is a separate entity and i find myself jumping in to different conversations of the same content to see what's being said in each. In addition to general replies often asking the same questions across all of the posts, unique engagement is diffuse and not connecting.

    I imagine that an OP would have trouble keeping up with all of these different interactions and likely defaulting to paying their attention to only one or two while the remaining posts are left to fend for themselves. Even if the OP stayed on top of them all, I assume they'd often have to answer the same questions multiple times.

    _The question I pose is: _

    What is the solution to myriad and diffuse conversations around cross-posts? Is there a way to handle this situation thru lemmy-ettiquette or does it require a technological solution?

    Maybe we handle it thru culture and expectation. If the decided upon method was to post once and then link that post to other communities for exposure, maybe that funnels everyone into one post to interact (when that's what OP wants).

    Is there a software solution on the app developer level that combines like posts together? Is it a protocol level solution thats required? Maybe something that allows a single post to essentially 'tag' different communities for exposure, while only posting once? Can we associate posts to an individual user rather than associating the post to a community, so all replies come to the user post rather than in a community?

    I don't know what the solution looks like and I'm not savvy enough to understand the protocol/software side to know if any of my examples are realistic. I also don't know if this is an issue for anyone else, or at least one that lemmy-ites actuallly care about enough to try and solve.

    Does anyone know if work is being done to address this? Am I focusing on something that is simply not a priority? I welcome your thoughts.

    ...I tried to choose what I thought was the best place for this post, but I'm open to moving it if I was in error. (Ironically, something that might be easier if posts were handled differently). :)

    Piefed groups comment boxes from crossposts into one post. So no matter which crosspost you're looking at, you'll see all responses.

  • Fediverse projects are maturing and adoption of them is trending up. I'm excited for the further development of the underlying technologies as well as the apps being built to leverage those technologies into even more integrated, user-friendly experiences.

    With any developing tech, small annoyances are found and ultimately patched or worked around. It's to be expected that no user experience is ever perfect, even for matured ecosystems. Typically, some smaller annoyances are tolerated when balanced with the overall utility and usefulness of the tech.

    One of the issues I've noticed (and I'm sure I'm not the first or only), is that when posts are relevant enough that the OP decides to cross-post into multiple communities, the comments and engagement stays with each community post leading to separate conversations.

    The existance of separate conversations itself isn't necessarily a bad thing. Maybe you post a recipe for Pot Roast in a general cooking community and also a community that helps refine recipes to improve them. It may be that the two separate conversations make more sense as the nature of discourse is focused on two different aspects of the content posted. If they were combined, it would be more difficult to sift through chatter to get at the discussion you were looking for.

    This concept is true for different communities as well as different instances. Maybe the Pot Roast recipe conversation generated on lemmy.carnivores is substantly different from the conversation at lemmy.vegan-curious and the existance of both is bolstered by the cultures and seneabilities of the different instance/communities. That could create usefull and/or thoughtful discourse that maybe wouldn't have happened if everyone was mixed together and talking past each other.

    However, there are plenty of informative posts attached to very similar communities on a given instance as well as posted to mirror-communities across separate instances. Each individual post is a separate entity and i find myself jumping in to different conversations of the same content to see what's being said in each. In addition to general replies often asking the same questions across all of the posts, unique engagement is diffuse and not connecting.

    I imagine that an OP would have trouble keeping up with all of these different interactions and likely defaulting to paying their attention to only one or two while the remaining posts are left to fend for themselves. Even if the OP stayed on top of them all, I assume they'd often have to answer the same questions multiple times.

    _The question I pose is: _

    What is the solution to myriad and diffuse conversations around cross-posts? Is there a way to handle this situation thru lemmy-ettiquette or does it require a technological solution?

    Maybe we handle it thru culture and expectation. If the decided upon method was to post once and then link that post to other communities for exposure, maybe that funnels everyone into one post to interact (when that's what OP wants).

    Is there a software solution on the app developer level that combines like posts together? Is it a protocol level solution thats required? Maybe something that allows a single post to essentially 'tag' different communities for exposure, while only posting once? Can we associate posts to an individual user rather than associating the post to a community, so all replies come to the user post rather than in a community?

    I don't know what the solution looks like and I'm not savvy enough to understand the protocol/software side to know if any of my examples are realistic. I also don't know if this is an issue for anyone else, or at least one that lemmy-ites actuallly care about enough to try and solve.

    Does anyone know if work is being done to address this? Am I focusing on something that is simply not a priority? I welcome your thoughts.

    ...I tried to choose what I thought was the best place for this post, but I'm open to moving it if I was in error. (Ironically, something that might be easier if posts were handled differently). :)

    Different conversations in different moods and cultures on the same subject are something completely human and normal, and tech should not work to undo this. When we have seen tech undo this is with social media silos, after all.

    Which is to say, any "solution" that integrates those conversations into one view should be, where possible, client-side only. That way I can opt in to view some conversations as unified or not, depending on eg.: how well do I know the context, or whether the OP is a person known for cross-posting (and to where), while at the same time not forcing everyone else to have their culture of conversation subsumed into essentially an attempt to make topical subreddits.

  • Fediverse projects are maturing and adoption of them is trending up. I'm excited for the further development of the underlying technologies as well as the apps being built to leverage those technologies into even more integrated, user-friendly experiences.

    With any developing tech, small annoyances are found and ultimately patched or worked around. It's to be expected that no user experience is ever perfect, even for matured ecosystems. Typically, some smaller annoyances are tolerated when balanced with the overall utility and usefulness of the tech.

    One of the issues I've noticed (and I'm sure I'm not the first or only), is that when posts are relevant enough that the OP decides to cross-post into multiple communities, the comments and engagement stays with each community post leading to separate conversations.

    The existance of separate conversations itself isn't necessarily a bad thing. Maybe you post a recipe for Pot Roast in a general cooking community and also a community that helps refine recipes to improve them. It may be that the two separate conversations make more sense as the nature of discourse is focused on two different aspects of the content posted. If they were combined, it would be more difficult to sift through chatter to get at the discussion you were looking for.

    This concept is true for different communities as well as different instances. Maybe the Pot Roast recipe conversation generated on lemmy.carnivores is substantly different from the conversation at lemmy.vegan-curious and the existance of both is bolstered by the cultures and seneabilities of the different instance/communities. That could create usefull and/or thoughtful discourse that maybe wouldn't have happened if everyone was mixed together and talking past each other.

    However, there are plenty of informative posts attached to very similar communities on a given instance as well as posted to mirror-communities across separate instances. Each individual post is a separate entity and i find myself jumping in to different conversations of the same content to see what's being said in each. In addition to general replies often asking the same questions across all of the posts, unique engagement is diffuse and not connecting.

    I imagine that an OP would have trouble keeping up with all of these different interactions and likely defaulting to paying their attention to only one or two while the remaining posts are left to fend for themselves. Even if the OP stayed on top of them all, I assume they'd often have to answer the same questions multiple times.

    _The question I pose is: _

    What is the solution to myriad and diffuse conversations around cross-posts? Is there a way to handle this situation thru lemmy-ettiquette or does it require a technological solution?

    Maybe we handle it thru culture and expectation. If the decided upon method was to post once and then link that post to other communities for exposure, maybe that funnels everyone into one post to interact (when that's what OP wants).

    Is there a software solution on the app developer level that combines like posts together? Is it a protocol level solution thats required? Maybe something that allows a single post to essentially 'tag' different communities for exposure, while only posting once? Can we associate posts to an individual user rather than associating the post to a community, so all replies come to the user post rather than in a community?

    I don't know what the solution looks like and I'm not savvy enough to understand the protocol/software side to know if any of my examples are realistic. I also don't know if this is an issue for anyone else, or at least one that lemmy-ites actuallly care about enough to try and solve.

    Does anyone know if work is being done to address this? Am I focusing on something that is simply not a priority? I welcome your thoughts.

    ...I tried to choose what I thought was the best place for this post, but I'm open to moving it if I was in error. (Ironically, something that might be easier if posts were handled differently). :)

    Is there a software solution on the app developer level that combines like posts together?

    As mentioned in this thread already, piefed consolidates all the comments for crossposts when it detects them. As an example, you can look at this post on piefed.social. The link I shared is for the post on !news@lemmy.world, but below it you can see comments from the same article posted in !unitedkingdom@feddit.uk as well as !world@lemmy.world in their own sections as you keep scrolling. So, problem solved, right? Well...

    One of the key phrases I used above is "when it detects them". So, how does piefed detect crossposts? The answer is pretty simple, it basically just looks for other posts that point to the same destination url. In the example I linked, that would be the Guardian article that is being discussed. This is the same way that lemmy detects crossposts. This approach is nice and easy and computationally cheap on the database (quick), however, there is a big shortfall of this method...posts that don't point to a url (discussion posts) can never be detected as crossposts. Lemmy offers the ability to hit the crosspost button on a discussion post and it will create a big block quote of the original post for you, but it isn't actually recognized as a crosspost in the software.

    I don't have a good technical solution to be able to make discussion posts (and other non-url posts, like piefed events or polls) be crossposted properly. It likely would need to be tracked in the database somehow, but it would rely on users somehow indicating that the post they are making is meant to be a crosspost. I don't know really...

    Anyway, that is the current state of crossposts. Thanks for coming to my TED Talk.

  • Fediverse projects are maturing and adoption of them is trending up. I'm excited for the further development of the underlying technologies as well as the apps being built to leverage those technologies into even more integrated, user-friendly experiences.

    With any developing tech, small annoyances are found and ultimately patched or worked around. It's to be expected that no user experience is ever perfect, even for matured ecosystems. Typically, some smaller annoyances are tolerated when balanced with the overall utility and usefulness of the tech.

    One of the issues I've noticed (and I'm sure I'm not the first or only), is that when posts are relevant enough that the OP decides to cross-post into multiple communities, the comments and engagement stays with each community post leading to separate conversations.

    The existance of separate conversations itself isn't necessarily a bad thing. Maybe you post a recipe for Pot Roast in a general cooking community and also a community that helps refine recipes to improve them. It may be that the two separate conversations make more sense as the nature of discourse is focused on two different aspects of the content posted. If they were combined, it would be more difficult to sift through chatter to get at the discussion you were looking for.

    This concept is true for different communities as well as different instances. Maybe the Pot Roast recipe conversation generated on lemmy.carnivores is substantly different from the conversation at lemmy.vegan-curious and the existance of both is bolstered by the cultures and seneabilities of the different instance/communities. That could create usefull and/or thoughtful discourse that maybe wouldn't have happened if everyone was mixed together and talking past each other.

    However, there are plenty of informative posts attached to very similar communities on a given instance as well as posted to mirror-communities across separate instances. Each individual post is a separate entity and i find myself jumping in to different conversations of the same content to see what's being said in each. In addition to general replies often asking the same questions across all of the posts, unique engagement is diffuse and not connecting.

    I imagine that an OP would have trouble keeping up with all of these different interactions and likely defaulting to paying their attention to only one or two while the remaining posts are left to fend for themselves. Even if the OP stayed on top of them all, I assume they'd often have to answer the same questions multiple times.

    _The question I pose is: _

    What is the solution to myriad and diffuse conversations around cross-posts? Is there a way to handle this situation thru lemmy-ettiquette or does it require a technological solution?

    Maybe we handle it thru culture and expectation. If the decided upon method was to post once and then link that post to other communities for exposure, maybe that funnels everyone into one post to interact (when that's what OP wants).

    Is there a software solution on the app developer level that combines like posts together? Is it a protocol level solution thats required? Maybe something that allows a single post to essentially 'tag' different communities for exposure, while only posting once? Can we associate posts to an individual user rather than associating the post to a community, so all replies come to the user post rather than in a community?

    I don't know what the solution looks like and I'm not savvy enough to understand the protocol/software side to know if any of my examples are realistic. I also don't know if this is an issue for anyone else, or at least one that lemmy-ites actuallly care about enough to try and solve.

    Does anyone know if work is being done to address this? Am I focusing on something that is simply not a priority? I welcome your thoughts.

    ...I tried to choose what I thought was the best place for this post, but I'm open to moving it if I was in error. (Ironically, something that might be easier if posts were handled differently). :)

    What I think would be interesting would be to have communities be tags rather than exclusive categories. So if you make a post, you can add more than one tag to it, provided you are a 'member' of those tags.

    Tags would have moderators much like communities have moderators now, to preserve the meaning of the tag. So you could have a tag like 'billionaire media', and members could slap that tag on all nyt, wapo, etc articles. Moderators would boot members who misapplied the tag.

    Then what would be interesting would be to use the tags for searches, like 'news' minus 'billiionaire media'.

    Pretty significant changes from what lemmy is today, so would be either a fork of lemmy or a from scratch new program.

  • What I think would be interesting would be to have communities be tags rather than exclusive categories. So if you make a post, you can add more than one tag to it, provided you are a 'member' of those tags.

    Tags would have moderators much like communities have moderators now, to preserve the meaning of the tag. So you could have a tag like 'billionaire media', and members could slap that tag on all nyt, wapo, etc articles. Moderators would boot members who misapplied the tag.

    Then what would be interesting would be to use the tags for searches, like 'news' minus 'billiionaire media'.

    Pretty significant changes from what lemmy is today, so would be either a fork of lemmy or a from scratch new program.

    It's a viable model, but it's not the Lemmy model, because that's a clone of the reddit model. I don't know if that's implemented anywhere though.

  • Fediverse projects are maturing and adoption of them is trending up. I'm excited for the further development of the underlying technologies as well as the apps being built to leverage those technologies into even more integrated, user-friendly experiences.

    With any developing tech, small annoyances are found and ultimately patched or worked around. It's to be expected that no user experience is ever perfect, even for matured ecosystems. Typically, some smaller annoyances are tolerated when balanced with the overall utility and usefulness of the tech.

    One of the issues I've noticed (and I'm sure I'm not the first or only), is that when posts are relevant enough that the OP decides to cross-post into multiple communities, the comments and engagement stays with each community post leading to separate conversations.

    The existance of separate conversations itself isn't necessarily a bad thing. Maybe you post a recipe for Pot Roast in a general cooking community and also a community that helps refine recipes to improve them. It may be that the two separate conversations make more sense as the nature of discourse is focused on two different aspects of the content posted. If they were combined, it would be more difficult to sift through chatter to get at the discussion you were looking for.

    This concept is true for different communities as well as different instances. Maybe the Pot Roast recipe conversation generated on lemmy.carnivores is substantly different from the conversation at lemmy.vegan-curious and the existance of both is bolstered by the cultures and seneabilities of the different instance/communities. That could create usefull and/or thoughtful discourse that maybe wouldn't have happened if everyone was mixed together and talking past each other.

    However, there are plenty of informative posts attached to very similar communities on a given instance as well as posted to mirror-communities across separate instances. Each individual post is a separate entity and i find myself jumping in to different conversations of the same content to see what's being said in each. In addition to general replies often asking the same questions across all of the posts, unique engagement is diffuse and not connecting.

    I imagine that an OP would have trouble keeping up with all of these different interactions and likely defaulting to paying their attention to only one or two while the remaining posts are left to fend for themselves. Even if the OP stayed on top of them all, I assume they'd often have to answer the same questions multiple times.

    _The question I pose is: _

    What is the solution to myriad and diffuse conversations around cross-posts? Is there a way to handle this situation thru lemmy-ettiquette or does it require a technological solution?

    Maybe we handle it thru culture and expectation. If the decided upon method was to post once and then link that post to other communities for exposure, maybe that funnels everyone into one post to interact (when that's what OP wants).

    Is there a software solution on the app developer level that combines like posts together? Is it a protocol level solution thats required? Maybe something that allows a single post to essentially 'tag' different communities for exposure, while only posting once? Can we associate posts to an individual user rather than associating the post to a community, so all replies come to the user post rather than in a community?

    I don't know what the solution looks like and I'm not savvy enough to understand the protocol/software side to know if any of my examples are realistic. I also don't know if this is an issue for anyone else, or at least one that lemmy-ites actuallly care about enough to try and solve.

    Does anyone know if work is being done to address this? Am I focusing on something that is simply not a priority? I welcome your thoughts.

    ...I tried to choose what I thought was the best place for this post, but I'm open to moving it if I was in error. (Ironically, something that might be easier if posts were handled differently). :)

    everyone said PieFed, but Lemmy v1.0 will be improving this a bit too

    You can see it lists the crossposts showing how many comments and upvotes each has

    The Boost app does a pretty decent job of this too already

    https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy-ui/pull/3387

  • Fediverse projects are maturing and adoption of them is trending up. I'm excited for the further development of the underlying technologies as well as the apps being built to leverage those technologies into even more integrated, user-friendly experiences.

    With any developing tech, small annoyances are found and ultimately patched or worked around. It's to be expected that no user experience is ever perfect, even for matured ecosystems. Typically, some smaller annoyances are tolerated when balanced with the overall utility and usefulness of the tech.

    One of the issues I've noticed (and I'm sure I'm not the first or only), is that when posts are relevant enough that the OP decides to cross-post into multiple communities, the comments and engagement stays with each community post leading to separate conversations.

    The existance of separate conversations itself isn't necessarily a bad thing. Maybe you post a recipe for Pot Roast in a general cooking community and also a community that helps refine recipes to improve them. It may be that the two separate conversations make more sense as the nature of discourse is focused on two different aspects of the content posted. If they were combined, it would be more difficult to sift through chatter to get at the discussion you were looking for.

    This concept is true for different communities as well as different instances. Maybe the Pot Roast recipe conversation generated on lemmy.carnivores is substantly different from the conversation at lemmy.vegan-curious and the existance of both is bolstered by the cultures and seneabilities of the different instance/communities. That could create usefull and/or thoughtful discourse that maybe wouldn't have happened if everyone was mixed together and talking past each other.

    However, there are plenty of informative posts attached to very similar communities on a given instance as well as posted to mirror-communities across separate instances. Each individual post is a separate entity and i find myself jumping in to different conversations of the same content to see what's being said in each. In addition to general replies often asking the same questions across all of the posts, unique engagement is diffuse and not connecting.

    I imagine that an OP would have trouble keeping up with all of these different interactions and likely defaulting to paying their attention to only one or two while the remaining posts are left to fend for themselves. Even if the OP stayed on top of them all, I assume they'd often have to answer the same questions multiple times.

    _The question I pose is: _

    What is the solution to myriad and diffuse conversations around cross-posts? Is there a way to handle this situation thru lemmy-ettiquette or does it require a technological solution?

    Maybe we handle it thru culture and expectation. If the decided upon method was to post once and then link that post to other communities for exposure, maybe that funnels everyone into one post to interact (when that's what OP wants).

    Is there a software solution on the app developer level that combines like posts together? Is it a protocol level solution thats required? Maybe something that allows a single post to essentially 'tag' different communities for exposure, while only posting once? Can we associate posts to an individual user rather than associating the post to a community, so all replies come to the user post rather than in a community?

    I don't know what the solution looks like and I'm not savvy enough to understand the protocol/software side to know if any of my examples are realistic. I also don't know if this is an issue for anyone else, or at least one that lemmy-ites actuallly care about enough to try and solve.

    Does anyone know if work is being done to address this? Am I focusing on something that is simply not a priority? I welcome your thoughts.

    ...I tried to choose what I thought was the best place for this post, but I'm open to moving it if I was in error. (Ironically, something that might be easier if posts were handled differently). :)

    The solution has been, for decades, to dump the WWW and continue the Memex-Dynabook-Xanadu line of development where everything related is webbed together by default.

    The sick sad history of computer-aided collaboration
    https://www.quora.com/Who-invented-the-modern-computer-look-and-feel/answer/Harri-K-Hiltunen
    (long story)

  • Fediverse projects are maturing and adoption of them is trending up. I'm excited for the further development of the underlying technologies as well as the apps being built to leverage those technologies into even more integrated, user-friendly experiences.

    With any developing tech, small annoyances are found and ultimately patched or worked around. It's to be expected that no user experience is ever perfect, even for matured ecosystems. Typically, some smaller annoyances are tolerated when balanced with the overall utility and usefulness of the tech.

    One of the issues I've noticed (and I'm sure I'm not the first or only), is that when posts are relevant enough that the OP decides to cross-post into multiple communities, the comments and engagement stays with each community post leading to separate conversations.

    The existance of separate conversations itself isn't necessarily a bad thing. Maybe you post a recipe for Pot Roast in a general cooking community and also a community that helps refine recipes to improve them. It may be that the two separate conversations make more sense as the nature of discourse is focused on two different aspects of the content posted. If they were combined, it would be more difficult to sift through chatter to get at the discussion you were looking for.

    This concept is true for different communities as well as different instances. Maybe the Pot Roast recipe conversation generated on lemmy.carnivores is substantly different from the conversation at lemmy.vegan-curious and the existance of both is bolstered by the cultures and seneabilities of the different instance/communities. That could create usefull and/or thoughtful discourse that maybe wouldn't have happened if everyone was mixed together and talking past each other.

    However, there are plenty of informative posts attached to very similar communities on a given instance as well as posted to mirror-communities across separate instances. Each individual post is a separate entity and i find myself jumping in to different conversations of the same content to see what's being said in each. In addition to general replies often asking the same questions across all of the posts, unique engagement is diffuse and not connecting.

    I imagine that an OP would have trouble keeping up with all of these different interactions and likely defaulting to paying their attention to only one or two while the remaining posts are left to fend for themselves. Even if the OP stayed on top of them all, I assume they'd often have to answer the same questions multiple times.

    _The question I pose is: _

    What is the solution to myriad and diffuse conversations around cross-posts? Is there a way to handle this situation thru lemmy-ettiquette or does it require a technological solution?

    Maybe we handle it thru culture and expectation. If the decided upon method was to post once and then link that post to other communities for exposure, maybe that funnels everyone into one post to interact (when that's what OP wants).

    Is there a software solution on the app developer level that combines like posts together? Is it a protocol level solution thats required? Maybe something that allows a single post to essentially 'tag' different communities for exposure, while only posting once? Can we associate posts to an individual user rather than associating the post to a community, so all replies come to the user post rather than in a community?

    I don't know what the solution looks like and I'm not savvy enough to understand the protocol/software side to know if any of my examples are realistic. I also don't know if this is an issue for anyone else, or at least one that lemmy-ites actuallly care about enough to try and solve.

    Does anyone know if work is being done to address this? Am I focusing on something that is simply not a priority? I welcome your thoughts.

    ...I tried to choose what I thought was the best place for this post, but I'm open to moving it if I was in error. (Ironically, something that might be easier if posts were handled differently). :)

    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.

  • Is there a software solution on the app developer level that combines like posts together?

    As mentioned in this thread already, piefed consolidates all the comments for crossposts when it detects them. As an example, you can look at this post on piefed.social. The link I shared is for the post on !news@lemmy.world, but below it you can see comments from the same article posted in !unitedkingdom@feddit.uk as well as !world@lemmy.world in their own sections as you keep scrolling. So, problem solved, right? Well...

    One of the key phrases I used above is "when it detects them". So, how does piefed detect crossposts? The answer is pretty simple, it basically just looks for other posts that point to the same destination url. In the example I linked, that would be the Guardian article that is being discussed. This is the same way that lemmy detects crossposts. This approach is nice and easy and computationally cheap on the database (quick), however, there is a big shortfall of this method...posts that don't point to a url (discussion posts) can never be detected as crossposts. Lemmy offers the ability to hit the crosspost button on a discussion post and it will create a big block quote of the original post for you, but it isn't actually recognized as a crosspost in the software.

    I don't have a good technical solution to be able to make discussion posts (and other non-url posts, like piefed events or polls) be crossposted properly. It likely would need to be tracked in the database somehow, but it would rely on users somehow indicating that the post they are making is meant to be a crosspost. I don't know really...

    Anyway, that is the current state of crossposts. Thanks for coming to my TED Talk.

    This one of the great features of Piefed!

  • Different conversations in different moods and cultures on the same subject are something completely human and normal, and tech should not work to undo this. When we have seen tech undo this is with social media silos, after all.

    Which is to say, any "solution" that integrates those conversations into one view should be, where possible, client-side only. That way I can opt in to view some conversations as unified or not, depending on eg.: how well do I know the context, or whether the OP is a person known for cross-posting (and to where), while at the same time not forcing everyone else to have their culture of conversation subsumed into essentially an attempt to make topical subreddits.

    This is also how I feel.

    Getting different perspectives from different circles instead of being migrated to one dominant website culture is a big part of why I haven’t moved to piefed, since it seems like that semi-forced centralization is part of their vision.

  • Take it a step further, though. You shouldn't have to combine posts, they should all be the same post.

    Can you elaborate?

  • How does moderation work in this case?

  • Piefed groups comment boxes from crossposts into one post. So no matter which crosspost you're looking at, you'll see all responses.

  • This is also how I feel.

    Getting different perspectives from different circles instead of being migrated to one dominant website culture is a big part of why I haven’t moved to piefed, since it seems like that semi-forced centralization is part of their vision.

    Getting different perspectives from different circles instead of being migrated to one dominant website culture is a big part of why I haven’t moved to piefed, since it seems like that semi-forced centralization is part of their vision.

    Have you used Piefed and its multi-community comment system? I am asking because from using it, I don't the impression of "being migrated to one dominant website culture".

  • Fediverse projects are maturing and adoption of them is trending up. I'm excited for the further development of the underlying technologies as well as the apps being built to leverage those technologies into even more integrated, user-friendly experiences.

    With any developing tech, small annoyances are found and ultimately patched or worked around. It's to be expected that no user experience is ever perfect, even for matured ecosystems. Typically, some smaller annoyances are tolerated when balanced with the overall utility and usefulness of the tech.

    One of the issues I've noticed (and I'm sure I'm not the first or only), is that when posts are relevant enough that the OP decides to cross-post into multiple communities, the comments and engagement stays with each community post leading to separate conversations.

    The existance of separate conversations itself isn't necessarily a bad thing. Maybe you post a recipe for Pot Roast in a general cooking community and also a community that helps refine recipes to improve them. It may be that the two separate conversations make more sense as the nature of discourse is focused on two different aspects of the content posted. If they were combined, it would be more difficult to sift through chatter to get at the discussion you were looking for.

    This concept is true for different communities as well as different instances. Maybe the Pot Roast recipe conversation generated on lemmy.carnivores is substantly different from the conversation at lemmy.vegan-curious and the existance of both is bolstered by the cultures and seneabilities of the different instance/communities. That could create usefull and/or thoughtful discourse that maybe wouldn't have happened if everyone was mixed together and talking past each other.

    However, there are plenty of informative posts attached to very similar communities on a given instance as well as posted to mirror-communities across separate instances. Each individual post is a separate entity and i find myself jumping in to different conversations of the same content to see what's being said in each. In addition to general replies often asking the same questions across all of the posts, unique engagement is diffuse and not connecting.

    I imagine that an OP would have trouble keeping up with all of these different interactions and likely defaulting to paying their attention to only one or two while the remaining posts are left to fend for themselves. Even if the OP stayed on top of them all, I assume they'd often have to answer the same questions multiple times.

    _The question I pose is: _

    What is the solution to myriad and diffuse conversations around cross-posts? Is there a way to handle this situation thru lemmy-ettiquette or does it require a technological solution?

    Maybe we handle it thru culture and expectation. If the decided upon method was to post once and then link that post to other communities for exposure, maybe that funnels everyone into one post to interact (when that's what OP wants).

    Is there a software solution on the app developer level that combines like posts together? Is it a protocol level solution thats required? Maybe something that allows a single post to essentially 'tag' different communities for exposure, while only posting once? Can we associate posts to an individual user rather than associating the post to a community, so all replies come to the user post rather than in a community?

    I don't know what the solution looks like and I'm not savvy enough to understand the protocol/software side to know if any of my examples are realistic. I also don't know if this is an issue for anyone else, or at least one that lemmy-ites actuallly care about enough to try and solve.

    Does anyone know if work is being done to address this? Am I focusing on something that is simply not a priority? I welcome your thoughts.

    ...I tried to choose what I thought was the best place for this post, but I'm open to moving it if I was in error. (Ironically, something that might be easier if posts were handled differently). :)

    Every instance should simply just stop thinking they should have their own version of X community.

    Doesn’t PieFed merge communities with the same name?

  • Every instance should simply just stop thinking they should have their own version of X community.

    Doesn’t PieFed merge communities with the same name?

    @meldrik @BorisBoreUs Piefed can do that now?

  • I think it shows other comments, if the posts is crossposted.

  • Every instance should simply just stop thinking they should have their own version of X community.

    Doesn’t PieFed merge communities with the same name?


Gli ultimi otto messaggi ricevuti dalla Federazione
  • > If it's some automated feature, I don't think it should be in the source property of the federated JSON in the first place.

    Thanks, it's this.

    Edit: oh interesting, I looked into it. We serve the absolute URL in HTML but not in markdown. I had no idea threadiverse apps read the markdown. Neat!

    read more

  • Not sure if you're already aware, but that relative link there is broken in Lemmy, Mbin, and Piefed.

    If you used it manually, I'd suggest not using relative links in posts targeted at users from software that hasn't implemented them yet.

    If it's some automated feature, I don't think it should be in the source property of the federated JSON in the first place.

    read more

  • @rekall_incorporated@piefed.social said in [Fediverse wide cross-instance / cross-platform link substitution [UX improvement thoughts]](/post/https%3A%2F%2Fpiefed.social%2Fc%2Ffediverse%2Fp%2F1568622%2Ffediverse-wide-cross-instance-cross-platform-link-substitution-ux-improvement-thoughts):
    > This issue is unresolved in Lemmy, but the Lemmy brand is permanently tainted among users who are looking for alternatives to American oligarchic technology services. The low moral standards of the Lemmy devs' (support for the brutal North Korean regime, promotion of russian propaganda narratives that they know are false) is a massive turn off for the exact target market of the Fediverse. It's a fact that many Europeans looking for alternatives instinctively recognize the demagoguery of the Lemmy devs and their fans.

    I don't think this is true at all.

    The average user doesn't know what Lemmy is, let alone the political views of their core development team.

    But don't worry, it's like that joke about vegans:

    How do you know the Lemmy devs are politically dubious? Don't worry, someone on the threadiverse will tell you.

    read more

  • How the links act is different from client to client. If you click the link in the Lemmy web UI, it will take you directly to Lemmy.wtf, but if you used Voyager (iOS client), it will automatically redirect to your own instance.

    This is something that should be built into the Lemmy web UI.

    You can also use browser addons. I have an addon that redirects me to my own instance, if I click on a link in my browser. I also have an addon that takes me from YouTube to Peertube, if the video also exist in PeerTube or if I click a PeerTube link, it takes me to my instance.

    Also how dare you criticise the awesome TLD .wtf, which is clearly an abbreviation of “What The Fediverse”?!

    read more

  • I've seen that being used. It works fine for more technical users, but it's just an extra pain point.

    If you make links, you need to apply the service Different UI from whatever instance/client/platform that you are using.

    I much prefer Piefed's soon to be released link substitution feature.

    read more

  • Mbin has had that feature for a while too

    read more

  • It's a temporary workaround but the experience is still clunky

    read more

  • Well; atleast for lemmy, there's https://lemmyverse.link/ ; which fixes exactly what you mention. You send that link, other people choose their instance in the redirect, and boom!

    read more
Post suggeriti
  • 0 Votes
    1 Posts
    13 Views
    Right on the heels of WordPress 6.9 we released a new version of the ActivityPub plugin, making quote comments visible in the Reactions block and bringing you new ways of customizing your author pages.Quotes Join the Reactions PartyWhen someone quotes your post on Mastodon or other Fediverse platforms, you’ll now see it right alongside your likes and reposts. Quotes get their own row in the Fediverse Reactions display, making it easy to see at a glance who’s building on your ideas and adding their own commentary.Behind the scenes, we improved how we’re detecting quotes. Different platforms have their own ways of handling quote posts, and not all of them speak the same language. The plugin now understands these variations better, so whether someone quotes you from Mastodon, Misskey, or elsewhere, it just works.This means your engagement stats tell a fuller story. A quote isn’t just a repost—it’s someone adding their voice to yours, and now WordPress can recognize and display that distinction.Show Off Your Fediverse IdentityIf you’ve set up extra fields on your Fediverse profile—things like your website, pronouns, location, or links to other accounts—you can now display them directly on your WordPress site with the new Extra Fields block.Drop it onto any page, post, or your author archive template, pick a style that fits your theme, and your profile details appear right where your visitors can see them. Choose from a clean table layout, a stacked list, or styled cards. You can also control how many fields to show and customize colors to match your site.ChangelogAddedAdd documentation guide for using ActivityPub blocks in classic themes with Block Template PartsAdded a new Fediverse Extra Fields block to display ActivityPub extra fields, featuring compact, stacked, and card layouts with flexible user selection options.Added support for quote comments, improving detection and handling of quoted replies and links in post interactions.Add notifications for boosts, likes, and new followers in Mastodon apps via the Enable Mastodon Apps pluginAdds support for turning tags, categories, and custom taxonomies into federated collections in the Reader view so you can browse and follow topics more seamlessly.Prevent email notifications for comments on ActivityPub custom post types.Send a Reject activity when a quote comment is deleted, revoking previous quote permissions and ensuring consistent inbox handling.Store and retrieve webfinger acct for remote actors to improve identification and reduce lookupsChangedImprove gallery and image block markup for ap_posts with better alt text and optimized layouts.Improve support for media attachments by handling Audio, Document, and Video object types in addition to Images.Maintain consistent return values in Create handler.Remove trailing hashtags from incoming posts to prevent duplication with taxonomy tags.Store comments and reactions from followed actors on reader posts, and keep them separate from your site’s comments in wp-admin.Update compatibility testing for PHP 8.5 and WordPress 6.9Use tag name instead of slug for hashtag display.FixedAlways includes id, first, and last links in collection responses, ensuring followers and following lists display correctly in Mastodon.Automatically approves reactions on ActivityPub posts in the Reader view for a smoother, more seamless interaction experience.Deliver public activities to followers only.Disable REST API endpoints for internal post types.False mention email notifications for users in CC field without actual mention tags.Fix “Filename too long” errors when downloading attachments from URLs with query parameters (e.g., Instagram CDN URLs).Fix make_clickable corrupting existing anchor tags in ActivityPub contentFix PHP 8.5 deprecation warnings for ReflectionProperty::setAccessible() and ReflectionMethod::setAccessible()Improved handling of unusual activity data to avoid errors when activities contain unexpected formats.Preserve original ActivityPub activity timestamps when creating posts and comments instead of using current time.Prevented duplicate email notifications when ActivityPub instances re-send Follow activities for already-following actors.Prevents unwanted comment types—like pingbacks, trackbacks, notes and custom system comments, from being federated, ensuring only real user comments are shared with the fediverse.Removed a redundant instruction from the custom post content settings to simplify the UI.Reply block now shows fallback link when oEmbed fails instead of empty div.Simplified reply links by removing special handling for federated comments, making replies work the same for all comments where replying is allowed.Undefined array key warning in Scheduler::async_batch when called without arguments.DownloadsWordPress.org: activitypub.7.7.0.zipGitHub: tag/7.7.0Thank You!As always, a huge thanks to everyone who contributed code, reported bugs, tested early builds, and shared ideas. Every bit of feedback helps make ActivityPub for WordPress better for the whole community.Version 7.7.0 is available now—update and let us know what you think!
  • 0 Votes
    3 Posts
    25 Views
    @Micolcosta gente, come nella media del fediverso, simpatica. ha periodi in cui è lentone e buggato, però per condividere foto direi che va bene!
  • 0 Votes
    1 Posts
    15 Views
    So, today we've bridged our BlueSky account to the #Fediverse. Search for “ransomnews.online” and enjoy ;)
  • 0 Votes
    1 Posts
    17 Views
    🎤 Und es wird noch spannender – am Samstag gibt’s mehr Talks beim #Fediday! 🌐✨🔹 Protocol Convergence within Open Science Communication Networks👤 @cypherhippie🔹 Jenseits der 500 Zeichen – Makroblogging im #Fediverse👤 @pfefferleSeid dabei! 🚀💬