FEP-5219: Groups and permissions
-
This is a discussion thread for FEP-5219: Groups and permissions
Summary
This document describes a permission system for ActivityPub groups.
It is inspired by XEP-0045: Multi-User Chat, which defines a comprehensive permission system for XMPP group chats.
-
This is a discussion thread for FEP-5219: Groups and permissions
Summary
This document describes a permission system for ActivityPub groups.
It is inspired by XEP-0045: Multi-User Chat, which defines a comprehensive permission system for XMPP group chats.
The group actor itself is considered to have an
adminaffiliation.I would make the case against this as follows:
The Group actor itself is not a human, nor a participant, if this clause was not there the Group Actor would need to make sure there remains at least one (human) external
Actorasadmin. Making group control loss a thing of the past. And voiding the need to 'log in on the server and manually edit group permissions'.It would also open the door to having more than one
adminon the group. -
The group actor itself is considered to have an
adminaffiliation.I would make the case against this as follows:
The Group actor itself is not a human, nor a participant, if this clause was not there the Group Actor would need to make sure there remains at least one (human) external
Actorasadmin. Making group control loss a thing of the past. And voiding the need to 'log in on the server and manually edit group permissions'.It would also open the door to having more than one
adminon the group.
Group actors should have the maximum privileges because some actions may need to be performed by a Group actor rather than an admin or moderator actor. This may be necessary to protect moderators from retaliation, for example. Another use case for this is anonymous groups where all posts are attributed to a Group actor (example: Telegram channels).
Multiple
adminactors are already allowed - in this FEP and in FEP-1b12. -
Group actors should have the maximum privileges because some actions may need to be performed by a Group actor rather than an admin or moderator actor. This may be necessary to protect moderators from retaliation, for example. Another use case for this is anonymous groups where all posts are attributed to a Group actor (example: Telegram channels).
Multiple
adminactors are already allowed - in this FEP and in FEP-1b12.
Then that should be a very explicit requirement for someone 'super' admin to execute. Which makes the onus rely on a server, or if done manually on someone possibly outside of the group.
To me it would make more sense when the Group
Actoris know to have its limitations, so people can actually manage the reality of adversarial actions in a group. In stead of trying to fix social issues in a FEP. (something I've become intimately aware of ) -
This is a discussion thread for FEP-5219: Groups and permissions
Summary
This document describes a permission system for ActivityPub groups.
It is inspired by XEP-0045: Multi-User Chat, which defines a comprehensive permission system for XMPP group chats.
Is this a product of the Groups TF? Since you're the author I'm assuming that isn't the case.
It may be worth asking them to see what things they've converged on.
Ciao! Sembra che tu sia interessato a questa conversazione, ma non hai ancora un account.
Stanco di dover scorrere gli stessi post a ogni visita? Quando registri un account, tornerai sempre esattamente dove eri rimasto e potrai scegliere di essere avvisato delle nuove risposte (tramite email o notifica push). Potrai anche salvare segnalibri e votare i post per mostrare il tuo apprezzamento agli altri membri della comunità.
Con il tuo contributo, questo post potrebbe essere ancora migliore 💗
Registrati Accedi