#bonfire #ux improvement of the day: Be able to expand / collapse long replied post in feeds: loom.com/share/fb0d64b67b1b4...
@BonfireBuilders How do I see who own a topic? I want to contribute but there's no meta as far as I can tell.
good point - we need to add that part - do you have any requirements in mind beside showing the team / permissions ?
+Tropic_the_Topic
Trying to imagine a better way to navigate the #topic page and its contents.
The Topic page should ease the way of discovering / read about its main subject and navigate through sub topics.
Much improvements and neat features can be added, I tried to keep it simple to start the discussion.
Hi! 👀
hello 😊 👋
@mayel @facebook_is_better_than_bonfire testing responses. So are topics like groups?
they share similarities, but the focus of topics is more about collecting and curating information to share with a broader scope (eg. all subscribed users) - think of it more as a "magazine" with its editorial team, or "channels" (like in several chat applications) but on steroids
@dajbelshaw @bonfire @Supernova @Thursday @Dragan_Espenschied
here an attempt of an improved UI for boundaries, the main outcomes are:
- Reduce the permissions list toshow only the relevant ones for each activity type (eg. see / read / like / boost / mention / reply / edit (future one) / delete (future one) ...)
- Default the permissions to be the same for all the users/circles involved
- Let the user expand each verb to customise the permissions for the users involved (fig.3)
- replace the 3 icons that shows the permission states (can / undefined / cannot) with a more standard 3-toggle state
3 media
ah the img previews are displaied in the wrong order, the fig.3 is displaied as the first one (the flow should be from the last image to the first)
@mayel @ivan Love the circles/boundaries stuff! 🤘
Might be my lack of understanding, but I'm assuming that by defining a 'circle' I'm adding a group of people to a list.
This is different to creating a 'boundary' where I'm defining permissions of the people in that list in relation to my posts.
Is that right? At the moment, I feel like the circle/boundary language could be clearer?
@dajbelshaw @bonfire @Supernova @Thursday @Dragan_Espenschied
here an attempt of an improved UI for boundaries, the main outcomes are:
- Reduce the permissions list toshow only the relevant ones for each activity type (eg. see / read / like / boost / mention / reply / edit (future one) / delete (future one) ...)
- Default the permissions to be the same for all the users/circles involved
- Let the user expand each verb to customise the permissions for the users involved (fig.3)
- replace the 3 icons that shows the permission states (can / undefined / cannot) with a more standard 3-toggle state
3 media
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"?
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)
@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.
i agree, atm we put everything on the table but making hard life for users to actually use boundaries (or whatever they'll be called) - thinking what could be the best way to improve the UX collectively, maybe a series of open design workshop in september?
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)??
@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)
@bonfire @Supernova Yeah, I think that 'boundary' is a confusing name (in terms of UX, at least) as opposed to 'circle' 😆
@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?
ivan
boosted
👋 Hello, @ivan and I would like to share with you our application for the next round of the nlnet user operated fund: https://nlnet.nl/useroperated/
tl;dr we want to implement groups on bonfire, based on the work we did with boundaries and circles: hackmd.io/BlYSKmlcSk2yn_iAxS...
Any feedback is more than welcome 🔥 (deadline is tomorrow, so we are quite tight with timing unfortunately)
@ivan I just tried out leaving a comment on a public prototype.
If you're not logged in, you have the option of leaving a comment, but it doesn't work. Pressing "Send" in the comment box results in a message that says "There was an error." There was no mention of what the problem was, but I'm guessing it's because I wasn't not logged in.
If you are logged in, you can comment without a problem.
There are a lot of teething issues with Penpot at the moment and I found it slower to work in than Figma. I've been keeping an eye on the project and I provide feedback to the team, and I hope it continues to improve. But right now, I wouldn't recommend it for use in production unless you're willing to make some time to log the bugs and problems you encounter along the way.
did a first attempt: here a (almost) pixel perfect myfeed page: design.penpot.app/#/view/a90... I've created components out of all the main widgets / sections - it was fun, it's true, it is slower than figma but already quite usable imo
@ivan Thank you for taking a look!
I imagine that lots of Fediverse projects require some technical knowledge to set up. Even something relatively straightforward like "Go to Mastohost's website and pay for a hosting plan" might seem easy to someone with experience, but overwhelming for someone who doesn't know what they're doing.
It would be brilliant to work on removing that technical skills barrier in the open and create a new source of revenue for the projects. That's a great idea 🙌 if there's anything more I can help with, I'd love to be involved.
There might be concerns around having only 1 private company hosting the majority of instances for a platform, e.g. what happens if the platform gets very popular and an investor buys the biggest hosting company of that platform? It would be worth thinking about how we tackle that as well.
In terms of moving the design system to Penpot, I should let you know that you can share a prototype publicy like I did, but you can't share the actual design file publicy. You can only invite others to join via email - there's no option to share a view-only link or anything like that, which you have in Figma. So I think it would be harder for other designers to access Bonfire's design work if you move it into Penpot at this time.
re. penpot : is it possible to comment on a public prototype ?
Hey @ivan
I've been thinking a lot about how we could make federated social networks more accessible for people who:
- Don't want to learn how to set up hosting or use the terminal.
- Have a limited knowledge of instances, federation, and all the technical workings of the Fediverse.
- Want an online space for their community which isn't Facebook.
I know you mentioned it's something your team's been considering a lot as well.
I wanted to wireframe a Bonfire setup process which doesn't require any technical knowledge. No finding a hosting provider, and no using a terminal. I also wanted to experiment with concepts which users would be familiar with from other digital products, like "trial" and "upgrade," by offering hosting as a service which can be bought and managed within Bonfire.
My idea is that users can set up a test instance on a Bonfire-hosted server as a "free trial," with a limit on the resources which this instance can use. Once they have tried out Bonfire's features and customised their instance to suit their needs, they can then pay for a hosting plan with a partner company. Their instance's data is then transferred from the Bonfire-hosted server to the partner company's server, and any appropriate DNS records are set up automatically (either for the subdomain.bonfire.cafe address, or for their own custom domain).
Here's my prototype:
design.penpot.app/#/view/27a...
What do you think of the idea?
@Azuredusk10 wow this is so great, thanks for putting so much thoughts on it 😍 😍
This is quite a sincronicity indeed, because we are having this discussion again with @mayel since the past week.
It makes me wonder 2 things:
- Your initiative is an opportunity to try to develop such crucial feature (both in terms of user adoption and in term of economic sustainability) in the open and together with the community
- We can move the actual bonfire mockups design system from figma to penpot, and try to make it more accessible for other designers to use / improve it
oh that's nice, I just discovered that in italy are popping up several municipal federated instances ( bologna, senigallia, saronno) ... that would be such a cool use case to work with bonfire
ivan
boosted
I feel like the deprecation of internet links and other internet-native rich formatting features like block quotes, as well as hidden or hard restrictions on characters length hollowing contents from their substance make me post with little motivation, increasing by contrast, unconsciously, the crave for the usual brain stimulation reward.
Nowadays I enjoy my mistakes because I feel like by taking them positively, as an opportunity to learn from them and to do better, I'm becoming more motivated about these things. It's a virtuous circle that attention economy corps have blocked for about a decade.
Bonfire doesn't have this problem.
I have a suggestion for Bonfire:
@BonfireBuilders #bonfire_feedback
When going to the Messages section, there is a weird drop down menu appearing that says "My feed". It would be better to just leave the navigation list and highlight Messages instead of changing the mode of navigation suddenly. It looks like I'd be sending a message to my feed if I'd push the "New message" button.
uhm you have a point by saying that the dropdown menu that says "my feed" may confuse the user 🤔 🧐
I have a suggestion for Bonfire: while I'm all for experimenting with the UI, having eight different menu options together is... a lot!
Notifications, message, and favourites are qualitatively different, I would suggest, from feeds (my, local, federated). I'd expect to access settings and the ability to logout from my profile, perhaps? 😀
@BonfireBuilders #bonfire_feedback
uhm Are you suggesting to divide Feeds (my, local, federated) from Notifications / Messages / favourites ?
ps. just to add more stuff in this thread, as part of the work we're doing for CoS, we will soon release topics (which will include much of the features we were working on moodlenet btw) - and we wanted to add to that navigation also topics the current user subscribed to...
see the image:
