@dansup Just a suggestion, and I do not consider it urgent: to create video playlists, to allow to categorize videos by topic (like YouTube and PeerTube have).

@dansup Can you give some dev love to #pixelfed please, cause that's seriously broken...

@dansup Great! Will this be using GTS's vocabulary? https://docs.gotosocial.org/en/stable/federation/interaction_policy/ That would be cool.

I have volunteered for the task of turning their spec into a FEP (with the GTS team's permission) and I hope to get that done within a week or two. Would be amazing to convene on one approach, to increase the likelihood of larger projects also joining in.

@julian@fietkau.social if there's an FEP that would go a long way.

Care to share some details @dansup@mastodon.social ?

@Moaske simply log out, then log back in again, this will be fixed in the next release!

@Enea90 Playlists are coming!

https://github.com/joinloops/loops-server/blob/main/app/Models/Playlist.php

@dansup Awesome! Keep it up!

@dansup@mastodon.social When are we getting Mastodon, PeerTube and other Fediverse videos accessible through loops? The federation seems kinda strange at the moment and you can't pass videos through to the instance.

@dansup That did the trick for now. Thanks!

@sam We already support Mastodon, Pixelfed and others!

@dansup@mastodon.social Is it a whitelist only? because any time I've tried passing videos from my instance in the past it didn't work

@sam correct, we’re working on improving this with media proxies so we don’t need to store all remote media (which is the reasoning behind this)

@dansup@mastodon.social That is a good thing, do we have a ETA for this feature or a way we can request our external accounts to be whitelisted on Loops so we aren't just posting on both?

Will you use gts reply control style?

@gabboman no.

Pixelfed already implemented these years ago!

@julian @julian I think that solution developed for GoToSocial is only suitable for certain types of micro-blogging platforms, because they treat each comment as an independent context. But we can adopt their way of specifying permissions.

@silverpill That's on my mind too, but I'm not far enough yet with the conversion to judge whether the approach can be unified with context-awareness. There is already language on how replies should not be allowed to widen the reply permissions of a parent post.

I suspect a sticking point between the microblogging and threadiverse worlds will be whether someone is allowed to _narrow_ the reply audience within a thread – in effect letting people leave locked comments wherever.

@julian@activitypub.space @general

@julian@fietkau.social ah christ, yes. I suppose at the end of the day threadiverse software will still have to contend with content that exists independently of others, and so Note objects with their own interaction controls must still be respected.

It would be up to each individual implementation as to whether narrowing of scope is allowed from within the context of a thread.

Could you imagine, though, being so incensed that you reply to somebody disagreeing with them and then lock interaction controls so that they cannot reply? is that where we are now...

cc @silverpill@mitra.social

@julian@activitypub.space It's a bit like replying to someone and then immediately blocking them. Has happened to me on here, seen it loads on forums.

There are at least two ways to react to reply (or other interaction) controls: to treat them as gospel and prevent people on your platform from performing the action, or to acknowlede them as filters and display a banner or something on the reply form saying that the parent poster and people on other platforms may not see the reply.

@silverpill