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 23 139
  • 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
  • I think there's definitely an underserved space for academics on the fediverse.

    Feed-based mechanics are not good for archival or slower (read: not always online) readers, so NodeBB actually works really well to collect that stuff and present it in less of a firehose-y format.

    For example, here's a NodeBB forum that follows the #medicine tag: https://postcall.pub

    Here on ActivityPub.Space the discussion is all ActivityPub focused and it is really really good at keeping up to date with the latest topics.

    I'd be happy to work with you to start a general science (or more topic-focused) board if you're interested...

    read more

  • you may also find a slack channel dedicated to your field.

    read more

  • I think a lot of them moved to bluesky

    facepalm

    read more

  • I think a lot of them moved to bluesky.

    Here, I would just hang out in the science communities and other relevant ones, post relevant things and follow people you're interested in.

    read more

  • Create/join communities in your field, on Mastodon follow the hashtags and most importantly feed them with posts even if no one answers or interacts, someday you’ll reach the audience you’re looking for

    read more

  • The academic meme community here is absolutely ace! But what I would also like is to communicate with other academics in my field and share the latest publication and talk about it a bit if possible with peers.

    I used to use Twitter (back when it was called Twitter) to post about my new publications. Now I use Mastodon.
    Say what you wish about the negative aspect of algorithm based feeds, I am currently finding it hard to connect with other academics whose profiles may be dispersed in the wide fediverse.

    Long story short: How do I disseminate my work and connect with other academic peers in my field on the fediverse?

    I'm study biosystems and circular economy.

    read more

  • Good on you Rimu. If NodeBB implements Activity Intents it'll be because of you.

    read more

  • There is a FEP for this - https://codeberg.org/fediverse/fep/src/branch/main/fep/3b86/fep-3b86.md it's not something dansup came up with originally. We'll see how close Pixelfed adheres to it.

    PieFed has implemented basic support for that FEP since August 2025 and I just added more today.

    read more
Post suggeriti
  • 0 Votes
    1 Posts
    16 Views
    Destroying Autocracy – November 20, 2025Welcome to this week’s “Destroying Autocracy”.It’s your source for curated news affecting democracy in the cyber arena with a focus on protecting it. That necessitates an opinionated Butlerian jihad against big tech as well as evangelizing for open-source and the Fediverse. Since big media’s journalism wing is flailing and failing in its core duty to democracy, this is also a collection of alternative reporting on the eternal battle between autocracy and democracy. We also cover the cybersecurity world. You can’t be free without safety and privacy.FYI, my opinions will be in bold. And will often involve cursing. Because humans. Especially tech bros. And fascists. Fuck ’em.The Programmer’s Fulcrum is the future (and smaller) home for a fusion of Symfony Station and Battalion. Its tagline is Devs Defending Democracy, Developing the OMN.You can sign up now and for 2025 get an email with links to each week’s Symfony Station Communiqué and Battalion “Destroying Autocracy” post along with their featured articles. And you’ll be set with TPF after the fusing in January.We are posting on the Fediverse now at @thefulcrum @thefulcrum.dev and original website content will start in 2026.Featured Item(s)Muni Town writes:I’ve been trying to write this piece for years, really ever since I finished the first version of Open Source Explained (a v2 will drop early next year). Every time I get started I’m just overwhelmed with paralyzing visions of the commentariat accusing me of WrongThink.So I drop it, because I’m tired to the bone of debating the minutae of open source definitions when the conversation we ought to be having is about power: who has it? (oligarchs), how did they get it? (monopolies & corruption), why is that a problem? (platform autocracy), and how do we the people take that power back? (protocols and open software).Understanding ownership is powerIt’s important to understand the codes in your life, because your life is made up of them. Once you understand which codes you already have access to and even the right to inspect, you can see more clearly which other codes you ought to have insight into.Nothing makes me more anxious than writing about open source licensing because nothing brings out more opinion-havers, the vast majority of whom are speaking from a point of privilege-blindess in the western world. The widespread ignorance of the deeper power struggle at play (which we’re losing) has brought the free world to the very brink, so I’m pushing past the discomfort to honor the urgency of our moment.Open Source PowerWe start and end with good news to make the middle bearable.The response to Russia’s War Crimes, Techno Feudalism, and other douchebaggery404 Media reports:Ukraine Is Jamming Russia’s ‘Superweapon’ With a SongRadio Free Europe reports:How Britain’s Disposable Vape Ban Has Boosted Ukraine’s War EffortTechCrunch reports:Five people plead guilty to helping North Koreans infiltrate US companies as ‘remote IT workers’Surveillance Tech Provide Proteir Was Hackeda16z-backed super PAC is targeting Alex Bores, sponsor of New York’s AI safety bill — he says bring it onSoftware Maxims has:How FOSS Won and Why It MattersOpen Future announces:Open Future Joins the European Network for Technological Resilience and Sovereignty404 Media reports:Airlines Will Shut Down Program That Sold Your Flights Records to GovernmentFramasoft has:Renforcez l’internet du partage en contribuant à la robustesse de FramasoftSupport our 2026 campaign!The Register reports:Latest Servo release hints at a real Rust alternative to ChromiumBrussels eyes AWS, Azure for gatekeeper tag in cloud clampdownGame over: Europol storms gaming platforms in extremist content sweepThe Guardian reports:French authorities investigate alleged Holocaust denial posts on Elon Musk’s Grok AITechPolicy Press reports:Brazil Supreme Court Ruling Redefines Framework for Platform LiabilityNeutralTechCrunch reports:Databricks co-founder argues US must go open source to beat China in AIThe Guardian reports:AI firms must be clear on risks or repeat tobacco’s mistakes, says Anthropic chiefThe Center for Democracy and Technology reports:Architects of Online Influence: How Creators, Platforms, and Policymakers Shape Political SpeechTechPolicy Press says:If Europe Wants Digital Sovereignty, It Must Reinvent Who Owns TechMIT Technology Review reports:Quantum physicists have shrunk and “de-censored” DeepSeek R1The Evil Empire (AKA Autocracy) Strikes BackCorporate Europe reports:Preparing a roll-back of digital rights: Commission’s secretive meetings with industryThe Brussels Times reports:Secret EU plans to allow Big Tech to train AI with our personal dataThe Guardian reports:Dark forces are preventing us fighting the climate crisis – by taking knowledge hostage404 Media reports:This App Lets ICE Track Vehicles and Owners Across the CountryIRS Accessed Massive Database of Americans Flights Without a WarrantThe Register reports:Palantir plots NHS skills drive for its controversial data platformPariah StatesTechCrunch reports:US, UK, and Australia sanction Russian ‘bulletproof’ web host used in ransomware attacksForbes reports:Has Samsung Installed ‘Unremovable Israeli Spyware’ On Your Phone?The Register reports:Tens of thousands more ASUS routers pwned by suspected, evolving China operationBig MediaTBDBig TechThe Guardian reports:White nationalist talking points and racial pseudoscience: welcome to Elon Musk’s GrokipediaThe Register reports:Researchers find hole in AI guardrails by using strings like =coffee404 Media reports:A Researcher Made an AI That Completely Breaks the Online Surveys Scientists Rely OnThe ACLU reports:Your Smartphone, Their Rules: How App Stores Enable Corporate-Government CensorshipYep.TechPolicy Press reports:How Tech Oligarchs Profit from the Logic of ‘Finitude Capitalism’ and What to Do About ItCybersecurity/PrivacyPrivacy Guides has:Email Security: Where We Are and What the Future HoldsDarkReading asks:Can a Global, Decentralized System Save CVE Data?Heise reports:3.5 Billion Accounts: Complete WhatsApp Directory Retrieved and EvaluatedSignal or Delta Chat peeps.FediverseBen Werdmuller reports on:The State of the Open Social WebGreat Stuff as usual from Ben.ForBetter explores:The future of hope on the Social WebConnected Places has:Fediverse Report – 142Laura Hargreaves has:Ghost v6 Upgrade + Docker Migration: What I Learned (So You Don’t Have To)Big news with Mastodon this week:My next chapter with MastodonThe Future is Ours to Build – TogetherHopefully the new regime (foundation vs. benevolent dictator) will focus on trust & safety and not trying to be Twitter 2.Chris Sturmsucht shares:Fediverse: a new open and social webSlightly Decentralized Social MediaTBDCTAs (aka show us some free love)That’s it for this week. Please share this edition of Destroying Autocracy.Follow me on the Fediverse. Or this site via the button in the footer. Or via RSS. Or even our future home in 2026, if you want a head start.Keep fighting!Ringleader, BattalionReuben Walker Follow me on the Fediverse#activitypub #ai #autocracy #bigJournalism #bigTech #democracy #fascism #fediverse #ghost #mastodon #stopChina #stopIsrael #stopRedAmerica #stopRussia #supportUkraine #technoanarchism #technofeudalismhttps://battalion.mobileatom.net/?p=3954
  • PieFed 1.3 is released

    PieFed Meta fediverse piefed
    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    9 Views
    What's new Media library that lets you upload images to comments/post body and paste from the clipboard Animated gif support for user profile pictures Specify alt-text for link posts that link to an image Emoji picker and spoiler button added to markdown toolbar More links to the modlog (footer, community sidebar, user profile) and improved searching/filtering Leave a conversation to remove it from the list of their direct message conversations Post urls are now "friendly" since they include the community name and a snippet of the title instead of just a number Add link to show parent comment when directly viewing a comment reply Image markdown style formatting to allow more advanced control of how images are rendered. e.g. ![image alt text :: width=300px](https://url to image) Code syntax highlighting in code blocks and allow for style selection in user settings Tag cloud added to sidebar for feeds and topics Better searching and filtering of the Instances list Add a block (of a user, community, instance or domain) from the blocks and filters management area, without doing it via a post Popup suggestions when mentioning a community or user as you type Onboarding plugin which auto-subscribes, auto-blocks and sends a welcome message for new accounts Improved federation efficiency Old posts can be automatically archived (saved to S3) to free up database space Old posts by bots with no comments are automatically deleted LLDAP support, which does LDAP a bit differently To upgrade To upgrade from 1.2.x: git pull git checkout v1.3.x ./deploy.sh or ./deploy-docker.sh In the past we had a separate project for realtime notifications, which is now unsupported as it's code has been merged with the main PieFed project. To set it up, refer to the Push Notifications section of install.md. As well as enhancing the user experience doing this will decrease load on your server if it hosts local communities with many subscribers as some of the federation work has been offloaded to the push notifications service. Donations PieFed is free and open-source software while operating without any advertising, monetization, or reliance on venture capital. Your donations are vital in supporting the PieFed development effort, allowing us to expand and enhance PieFed with new features. Donations can be made via Patreon, Liberapay or Ko-fi.
  • 0 Votes
    1 Posts
    9 Views
    I'm looking for active federated communities on the fediverse where users share tips, tricks, and best practices for using the command line. Something similar to the Arch Linux forums but accessible through the fediverse. I've checked out a few communities like Command Line@lemmy.ml (1.47K subscribers) and Command Line@programming.dev (2.09K subscribers), but they seem to have many subscribers but no active users per month. It feels like Lemmy smothers these niche communities somehow. Does anyone know of other active federated communities or instances where command line enthusiasts gather to share knowledge and help each other out?
  • #Fediverse

    Fediverso fediverse
    3
    1
    0 Votes
    3 Posts
    4 Views
    @luftvaffel @_elena