@julian oh for sure! I guess I should clarify, how do you feel about them in your feeds?

@transicorn @erininthemorning.com absolutely! I am generally pro-bridging for this reason; I personally would rather stick to one platform but still be able to follow people who post elsewhere. But I do wonder if bridging is a wholly satisfactory solution, or more of a minimally-acceptable workaround when it comes to a person or organization choosing how they reach the fediverse.

@cassidy I think it's helpful to be able to see bridged accounts from the Fediverse.

My account is bridged, i shared a ton of music on Bluesky, now it appears there again through my Mastodon account and working linktree to sort again but posts are on Mastodon.

I'm unsure why people here think their own posts end up on Bluesky if they interact with users here if they haven't bridged their own account. The only things that end up on Bluesky are my own posts and boosts from other bridged users.

@cassidy People put 'No Bridge' in #Mastodon profiles.

If you don't bridge your Mastodon account, nothing you ever post ends up on #Bluesky. It's not done against your will by other users sharing or interacting with you who have bridged accounts.

@cassidy

Even though I have a preference for the underlying technology and platform — I think regular people should have to know or care about those details.

So, to me, bridging is a good thing.

@reiver @cassidy @general

For just publising and following posts from the other side it's fine. Interaction stays weird though. I'd prefer it working that way like the bifrost bridge for matrix/xmpp for example. Ryan says that would be very complex to get going though. Another issue is that it's opt-in so you'll likely never fetch complete conversations.

@morph @cassidy @general

I think the bridge should work like any other Fediverse server.

You don't have to opt-in to a Mastodon, or Pixelfed, or Misskey server to see your post. I think the same should be the bridge.

@reiver @cassidy @general

Yes ... you can follow public posts per RSS anyway. On the other hand wouldn't it cause massive load for the bridge server then?

@morph @cassidy @general

I could be mistaken, but — I don't think that is why the bridge was later changed to opt-in.

@reiver @cassidy @general

No, the reason was that people freaked out about their *public* content being bridged without consent.

Correct. Quite a few people were very clear that they don't want their puiblic posts bridged to Bluesky.

(Although I think Cassidy asking something different, how do people here (whether or not they personally are bridging) feel about seeing Bluesky accounts in their feeds.)

@morph @reiver @cassidy @general