@oliverandrich I'll ponder on this and see if I can come up with some starting points. The library does have a "reference server implementation"[1] but it's not entirely "minimal", because in it's smallest form an ActivityPub server needs to do quite a lot already: 1/ dispatch locally stored objects when requested2/ process remote activities targeted at local actors3/ process and dispatch client activities of local actorsOn top of these actions, a server might need to have additional behaviours attached to certain Activity+Object combinations.https://github.com/go-ap/fedbox

@seanm Since you're obviously smarter than the Masto team, why don't you code that up? The API is stable and well documented.

For MLs, leftists are never left enough.

@team@blog.purewebhosting.nz @gwilymgj@mastodon.social Standardising Public Information Publishing I think you should discuss this with the @swf@socialwebfoundation.org group. The issue of standardization is one of the most delicate in the relationship between the fediverse and the mastosphere, and will likely be resolved in different ways based on the so-called "doocracy." It will be important for it to adhere as closely as possible to W3C standards and be conceived in simple terms. Some platforms like Friendica have already solved the formatting of georeferencing and event data. (cc @heluecht@pirati.ca is right?) Should an entity run it’s own presence much like they run their own website or email? It depends a lot on the type of organization. A nonprofit organization could simply choose to be hosted by a federated social network in its own country. A public institution could do the same, but first consider opening a proprietary instance, since, depending on the institution's importance, the traffic flow could become problematic. A private company, on the other hand, has the obligation to create its own instance. If I were to manage an organization's faith migration, I would make these assessments by evaluating the TOSs of the instances in my country and, if I found one suitable, I would agree on my inclusion in advance with the instance administrators. I also remember that careful management of a federated WordPress or Ghost server is already an interesting solution, just as a federated NodeBB forum allows you to wonderfully control the moderation of your audience of interested users. Possible disadvantages Here we must be realistic: using commercial social media for your organization's communication is NEVER perceived as a problem! It will be difficult to obtain the exact costs of managing a social media account, and the employees (or vendors) who manage an organization's social media account are resistant to change. My advice is to find out in advance whether the organization already uses automated publishing systems, whether these systems include at least the Mastodon API, and whether these systems include engagement measurement systems; If they don't use automatic publishing, you can find a system that helps them manage everything more easily. I may be unpopular, but an organization shouldn't be forced to do without commercial social media! Any organization's social media strategy should have three ethical obligations: Maintain a presence on the most popular commercial social media platforms that are consistent with its audience, to ensure maximum reach. Maintain a presence on an open-source social network that allows users to follow the organization and interact with it without being tracked, profiled, or having their data transferred to problematic countries, because this is a guarantee for its customers/users. Prioritize communication on the open social network, publishing content on the federated account earlier and more carefully, and possibly attempting to move communication to the federated account.

well there's an NSFW Lemmy and Piefed instance now <img class="not-responsive emoji" src="https://activitypub.space/assets/plugins/nodebb-plugin-emoji/emoji/android/1f60f.png?v=9f67c8a21b0" title="" />