This is also about the name “Flathub.”

@mooooooo congrats, this is an accurate summary. We will never be able to create awesome, different, diverse, own things if we do not ignore mastodon for the "alpha". It does not necessary mean that it will not work somehow in the end.Apart from that the Client-To-Server protocol, Collections and the multilanguage properties …We are building menschys to make a fully compliant Server and a "reference client", then taxiteam and redaktor as diverse clients … Following you now. Co-orged the official ActivityPub Confs e.g. in Prague, am elected Social CG Policy Group Lead but if you interested, what Clemens, me and others are building, see the readme chaos https://codeberg.org/Menschys/fedi-codebase [we are starting to move to codeberg]

@nuages

It's been a couple weeks and I wanted to add another perspective about this. I noticed a user downvoting posts, https://lemvotes.org/user/FarStare@lemmy.dbzer0.com if it helps to have specifics. In the more than one full year of existing, they have never once contributed via making a post, never once commenting even, just doling out up- and down-votes in roughly equal proportion, and even those nearly exclusively via posts but almost never comments. I am not concerned about receiving votes from PugJesus - either up or down, as PugJesus has earned the right to speak on behalf of the community. But who is this other person who is influencing how others see my content? Are they male or female? Do they have a degree of some kind? Do they primarily visit meme communities, as the vote pattern might suggest, or other communities as well? So how do I feel about people who use the Threadiverse more than others? My answer is more complex and nuanced than simply yay or nay. I might prefer the opposite of the implemented feature even - the more someone posts (including comments?), the more upvotes they are allowed to make? Have they not earned such? Also, if votes were exposed, each individual could decide for themselves how they wanted to make use of voting - perhaps someone would ban PugJesus, or conversely write special code (a 3rd party app / API recipient?) to highlight posts that PugJesus upvoted (isn't that how "boosting" works? at least re-tweeting does). It's really difficult to guess what someone wants, as each person wants different things. Which is why ultimately in an effort to make things more fair & equitable, the solution can end up making it less so. I like the follow-up suggestion to leave this new option OFF by default, so that an instance admin would have to specifically opt-in, perhaps as part of an overall suite of features limiting things like posts and comments as well. Although really, I think other approaches might work better - e.g. why would someone want to limit themselves to "some" of PugJesus' content, wouldn't they rather simply have it all or else ban him from the instance and therefore have none? I am not seeing the benefit realistically of having "some", especially when the delimiter is not based on community or overall content but simply what time of day (based on an arbitrary threshold for when they starts and ends to restart the next period) the votes are cast?

Also the organisation managing the IT systems used for research and education: https://www.surf.nl/en/how-does-mastodon-work

@evanYes, I know it. And I'm already thinking about bringing it to Fedilab. My main difficulty right now is being alone with a lot of work already. But I do think it's also my role as a developer to bring things forward. Especially when I believe in it.

@toddsundsted@epiktistes.com absolutely. In fact, the app that made the AP news rounds a couple months ago was Holos, an AP client on your phone that connected to a server elsewhere. That's the ideal use case for C2S, but alas they didn't go that route. I'm hoping to look into using it to enable cross-instance activities. Think "liking and replying" using your Mastodon account while browsing a WordPress site.