This comment about instance-only posts is good, @Gargron, and I’ve been seeing this request for a looooooooong time.

You’ve asked ex tumblr users what features they’d like to see. If their requests echo long term users’, is it time to consider it?

@ghost @Gargron I'm of the unpopular opinion that there should be a kind of post that gets broadcast to all followers (across all instances), similar to followers-only, but is also public within its instance, similar to public instance-only posts.

If you follow someone for their LGBT content, and they post instance-only because their instance is a safe-space, what's the point of even following them, if you don't get to see anything they post? Are you *forced* to get new accounts everywhere, just because you care about ppl?

@ghost @Gargron I have yet to see anybody who advocates for instance-only posts address this issue. It's the main reason I don't use instance-only posts on an instance that supports them.

@SoniEx2 @Gargron where’s the law that says if instance-only posts are an option, users will ONLY post instance-only?

But in the absence of such a law, why is it a problem if someone chooses to post instance-only? That’s their prerogative if they want to use their account that way?

The option would also let users discuss instance-specific issues and decisions without being forced to use another service entirely.

It would be nice to be able to select instance+followers, but that’d be separate.

@ghost @Gargron I can only see it, in its current form, as useful for instance-specific issues!

Every time I wanted to post something to my instance I also wanted to post it to my followers. Every time, I chose to prioritize my followers, because they're more important to me than the instance. The instance doesn't know me as well as my followers.

@SoniEx2 @Gargron that’s understandable. But of course one size does not fit all. Some of us do belong to instances that are small communities. Just like offline communities, sometimes we talk to one circle of friends about different things than we do to other circles of friends/family. For example, I am not obligated to talk to my parents about my sex life just because I talked about it with friends. Maybe some people tell everyone everything, but I don’t.

@SoniEx2 @Gargron the option to be able to check off multiple boxes like followers and instance or unlisted and instance would be useful too. I think of that as expanding our audience options and natural evolution/growth of the feature.

@phoe @Gargron yep, it is. it'd be nice if those changes were adopted upstream.

@lawremipsum Is Gargron the only person really opposed to local-only?



Communities that want/need to be insular will already do that, you can't use design to make them act differently.

Better to let them do that on a sometimes basis than forcing them to completely isolate their instance.

@jeffalyanak @Gargron i can't tell if this comment is for or against instance-only posts.



Well, the main argument I've seen against instance-only posts is that it would let instances become insular.

I don't see any real-world downside to adding the feature but I do see a lot of real value to it.

@ghost @Gargron

Right now, a community that wants to offer a community-only experience has no choice but to de-federate completely.

Instance-only posts would let them be insular when they choose without forcing them to be insular all of the time.

@ghost @Gargron I don't think it's a good idea. This is getting away from the entire point of federation, creating silos.

Message boards already have this functionality, imho.

@sullybiker @Gargron so marginalized people should be relegated to PHPbb because you think having additional choices for audience configurations is the same as creating a silo? :thaenkin:

that doesn't address the issue of how it's impossible to conduct instance-specific business within an instance. as things stand now, if we want members to weigh in about major things like where/how we're hosted, we have to create telegram/matrix/bulletin board and completely leave masto to talk about masto.

@ghost @Gargron worth mentioning that glitch branch has has this for a while now

@ghost @Gargron i am sensitive to the issue that this could create siloing situations. that is very important. however, i think many of the problems with this could be solved if only admins could send this kind of message, exactly like a unix motd. this could be used both to promote positivity and broadcast server issues. if there is an issue including it in toots, could it be a simple admin motd message log or popup? apologies if i've missed anything.

@greg @Gargron i don't understand this assumption that if users could choose to make instance-only posts, that they would ONLY make instance-only posts.

just like private and unlisted posts didn't destroy the federated timeline, instance-only posts won't either.

as for a motd-style popup, that could be useful but seems like a lot of trouble when just being able to drop an instance-only post into the instance-TL would solve multiple issues and requests at once.

@ghost @Gargron that's a good point, and makes me remember that there is more to user freedom than the usual FOSS p.o.v. my little fed is less than a week old, so i'm not in any way a person that "knows better" than those who have been around the culture longer and are more familiar with the codebase.

after thinking about it more, an unlisted toot to local + followers would solve my concerns.

@greg that's reasonable. and i don't mean to come across as a know-it-all (or even a code expert), because i'm not... it's just that this request has been made soooooo many times with so many good and valid reasons, and the reasons against it are unfounded. since @Gargron put out a request to our new tumblr neighbors for feature requests, I wanted to reiterate the valid and useful feature requests already made, that have been dismissed for quite some time now.

@ghost @Gargron While I agree with providing choice, I feel this unfairly puts single-user instances like mine in an awkward position. We currently have no use for our Local timelines, and can only interact with other instances through federation. With instance-only posts, people like me would have no choice but to create accounts on other people's instances, which would run counter to ActivityPub's goal of achieving a federated social network, and would make running our own instances untenable.

@ghost @Gargron followers + instance only would be good, i wouldn't want instance only without followers + instance being an option

Sign in to participate in the conversation
ACP 🎉🍰

Anticapitalist Mastodon instance. Party means fun, not political party. But we're still political.