@trwnh @darius you want more actors, I want less actors

This, obviously, means war

@trwnh @erincandescent @darius neat! The https://github.com/evanp/bots-rodeo/ platform is supposed to do just that.

@trwnh @darius more specifically if *I* have multiple actors I want to it be around multiple facets of myself, not dictated by technological constraints or similar

@darius @trwnh I don't even like that I need to have an alt. We have Google+ esque circles in the protocol, I should be asleep to use them

(And don't get me started on the fact that replies to my followers only posts get addressed to the replying person's followers)

@trwnh @jenniferplusplus @erincandescent @julian @mike @hongminhee @thisismissem @michael @renchap

ActivityPubSubHubbub!

@erincandescent @darius I think I'll win the war because I have more actors on my side

@erincandescent @darius I will not stop until ActivityPub is a turing-complete computing platform

@trwnh @erincandescent turing completion considered harmful

@erincandescent @darius This! Let me create Collections that represent arbitrary subsets of my followers. Let me address them. Stupid sharedInbox makes this "inefficient", though.

@darius @erincandescent *me reading that activitypub uses actors and an actor model* ah so i can spin up an actor for every object in my object-oriented design program that runs on the ActivityPub Virtual Machine. i love being a computer scientist

@julian for all its discussions and arguments about issues with interop in activitypub, the upside is that this discussion is all happening on an actual-to-god forum, with everyone participation via their microblogging account.

browsing the thread from the nodebb interface is soo different than via your microblogging interface

@darius @erincandescent actually isn't this more or less what spritely goblins is for

@laurenshof@indieweb.social yes, there are pros and cons (but mostly pros!)

The one con is that microblogging tends to encourage a more bush-like tree, with many separate conversations that can trace their lineage back to a root node. A forum with a linear interface can and does struggle at times with that use-case.

The solution is, of course, to fork out a subset of the conversation into a new topic/context, but there is currently no as:Fork activity, and therefore no support *sheds tear*

@trwnh @erincandescent dark magic that I leave to Christine

@thisismissem @trwnh @julian @pfefferle @manton @samsethi @renchap @andypiper Beware those stop gap solutions that become permanent instead of temporary in nature.

@julian

promote the "Open Original Page" button

This will only work for as:public

@julian I recently got interested in building topic-first discovery of content/conversations (Slack/Discord-like groupchat rather than "microblogging" which emphasizes recency and user identity). I ended up relying on Mastodon's hashtags (which users can already subscribe/follow), and elevating them in the user interface (a Slack-like sidebar which lists user's followed hashtags). But this bakes in certain expectations about topics/hashtags - how permanent and universal they are. Forking out a subset of the conversations into a new "topic" raises so many questions. "Topics" really is a big can of worms.

Another frustration I ran into with Zulip requiring a "topic" for every new thread was, how much user friction it introduces. Discord solved it by automatically inferring a topic or thread title whenever a thread is created. Would like to see more of this (more organized content, without burdening the user but still allowing them to re-organize).

@julian @thisismissem @hongminhee @pfefferle Our primary view for longform content (articles) is an inbox/reader list of posts - where it makes sense to show a preview (as inboxes and readers do) before opening. Preview requires an object, so as:Note felt like the most logical object to fit there. We're mainly using this for Ghost<>Ghost atm.

@julian @thisismissem @hongminhee @pfefferle Separately, Mastodon are doing great work and have a non-stop barrage of feature requests (often: demands) from all sides, and everyone is convinced theirs is the most critical (ofc).

We've chatted to them about long-form, and they're well aware

They don't need importance impressed upon them, but they certainly do need funding and PRs — so I think you're very much on the right track there!

@julian I totally agree with @renchap that it is important to keep the user on the platform of his/her choice! I like the idea of having a better "read more" UX or maybe the lightbox idea.

But to have the best possible experience and to improve the engagement, you should not force the user to leave the platform.

Otherwise it feels very much like subscribing to an RSS-Feed with only excerpts, where you always have to leave the reader for reading the whole text!