let's see if it works now
It does!
Dragan Espenschied
@Dragan_Espenschied@playground.bonfire.cafe
Testing upload
It seems like it is not possible to upload images at the moment? #bonfire_feedback
From a technical point of view, adding such info in feed views without impacting loading times to a point where it's not usable will probably mean we need to introduce caching (which we luckily haven't needed until now, as cache invalidation is famously said to be one of the "2 hard problems in computer science")... but it does indeed seem worthwhile!
Oomph I can imagine how difficult that is in a federated setting.! Maybe a balance can be found that just gives a rough sense of the "context size" of a post instead of being very exact about the whole thread metadata?
this makes a lot of sense, especially since our thread UX is not the flat standard one, when a user replies from the timeline, they don't know in which layer of the tree they're replying to.
There is always a balance to find between overwhelming the feed showing too much info per single post and not giving enough context to the user (as it is now in bonfire and most of the social networks i'm aware of)
My sense is that commercial social networks have a high interest in providing minimal context. Minimal context increases engagement because users cannot figure out what has already been said in a discussion. Discussions most of the time look as if everything is still very "open" even if hundreds of messages already exist. The most "successful" posts on commercial social media work best without requiring any context. Such posts can be easily algorithmically processed, and presented to users at any time in any other context. Even the slightest improvement in that era would make bonfire stand out. The current nested thread view is already a great contribution.
I have a suggestion for Bonfire:
@BonfireBuilders #bonfire_feedback
Bonfire does a lot of great things with single posts:
- show them in a "timeline" view as they occur
- according to who I follow
- according to what topics I follow
- according to the instance I'm on
- personal messages
- show them in a threaded view highlighting semantic connections
- according to filters, such as searches for tags, or taking into account blocked users
It is everything that you'd want, but also a bit much. In particular, after seeing the threaded view once, I'm always having the impression that I am missing something when looking at a post. Bonfire allows for quite a rich context for every post, but most views present single posts. They might be parts of threads that I haven't visited before and therefore might misinterpret. I have to click on every post to see it in thread view to understand if I'm indeed missing something.
It would be great if each post would feature some information about its context. For instance, it could show a mini-map of the thread, or display metadata like "part of a conversation started 2022-09-19, 4 participaring users, 34 messages (3 unread)"
If threads were more of a basic unit users would interact with (rather than single posts), it could also be possible to mute a thread. For instance when all your friends start to talk about some sporting event that you're not interested in or whatever.
Things like that could encourage better discussions, as in slower, less repetitive, more interaction with other thread participants.
@BonfireBuilders congrats on improving the playground's performance so much, quite snappy now!
I have a suggestion for Bonfire:
@BonfireBuilders #bonfire_feedback
Increasing the border-radius of toggles and radio buttons to 2px makes them look much nicer on 1:1 pixel density displays. The 1px border radius exposes some unpleasant aliasing.
2 media
I have a suggestion for Bonfire:
@BonfireBuilders #bonfire_feedback
In this screen modal for selecting applicable boundaries, I'd suggest using the + symbol only for creating new boundaries, and checkboxes / radiobuttons for picking what boundaries to apply.
Since you posted this with the "Public" boundary, everyone can see it, and it is specifically shown to your followers, the followers of +Tropic_is_no_fun and in the "Local" feed.
@Tropic_is_no_fun @vera @ivan @mayel Will it be possible for anybody to create a sub-topic? Will subscribers to the main topic be notified of that sub-topic being created? I think there is some potential to malicious/adversarial sub-topics...
Group:
Unknown type of activity/object
Group:
Unknown type of activity/object
Probably because, differently from channels, our topics include the possibility to be grouped in a taxonomy tree, so that eg: the "All about veganism" topic can be a children of "nutrition" and parent of "tofu recipes" topics (Nd such taxonomy is also federated, so the tree can span different instances as well once we get it)
Interesting! So it is like usenet newgroups a bit.
I understand "channel" has a one-to-many connotation that you probably want to avoid. But isn't this like "groups" then?
How would the hierarchy be formed?
@Dragan_Espenschied @Tropic_the_Topic it is like a collection of things that belong together, like "channels" where only users with specific permissions can add / moderate stuff.
Being the topic an AP actor, other users can follow and receive notification each time something get published (and automatically re-boosted by the topic)
I think it makes a big difference that the topic "acts" like a regular "user" account but is stewarded by potentially many users. Why don't you just name this "channels"?
I have a suggestion for Bonfire:
@BonfireBuilders #bonfire_feedback
The identity that wrote a post shouldn't get notifications about that same post.
@dajbelshaw @bonfire @Supernova interesting, tough creating a circle and assing permissions to them are 2 separated actions (and happens in different times and page)
Your suggestion is to merge them together?
@dajbelshaw @bonfire @Supernova @Thursday @ivan I would indeed merge them together. Otherwise you can easily end up with an AWS IAM system oder endless mix-and-match options like the NTFS file system exposes.
@dajbelshaw @bonfire @Supernova @ivan how about using terminology of a campfire? Something like campgrounds for boundary? Users may be more familiar with the naming more than abstract nature of the word boundaries.
Circle I think makes sense. But due to social network nomenclature, maybe group or camp members would work better? If you want individuals to understand what they are using, similar verbs may be necessary for similar concepts. Otherwise, it can produce confusion regardless of the intention for simplicity or clarity.
+bonfire Getting too metaphorical is risky. Personally I never go camping, and have no idea what campgrounds are.
I agree boundaries is not an ideal term, but not because it is abstract, it just doen't fit 100%. Bounded posts are not changing their shape, or growing or shrinking in size. They have certain rules about who can see and interact with them. It is like every post can be its own little forum. My suggestion would be rules or access.
I have a suggestion for Bonfire:
@BonfireBuilders #bonfire_feedback
It seems strange that the topic view doesn't displays nested comments.
What is a topic, a more "stable" place for discussion and moderation (which would benefit from nesting), a collection of things that belong together (more like tags), or an automated user (as topics are "boosting" posts)??
+Tropic_the_Topic naaa...
+Tropic_the_Topic Now what, is there no nesting?
