{"p":"","h":{"iv":"ROXSYW+cfvEbFHu5","at":"ocxplSQjdRC3tXEtB/9/wg=="}}

@darius @roadriverrail

I agree. I was not involved and do not know the people directly involved.

I also think it was misunderstood and an opportunity was missed.

I appreicated the developers attempt and his documentation of what went wrong and how it might be improved in future atttempts.

Sure, there is a lot developers can do in the Fediverse that would be welcomed.

But, I think that the incident also sent an unfortunate message to developers.

2
Share
Share on Mastodon
Share on Twitter
Share on Facebook
Share on Linkedin
Darius Kazemi

@stpaultim @roadriverrail Whereas I think it sends a pretty good message: users have the power to push back on devs *hard* and you had better incorporate community-driven design processes instead of just coming up with stuff and doing it. Or as the brilliant mcc@mastodon.social said (don't want to spam her):

"Maybe programmer people need to figure out a clearer division in their heads on the difference between experimenting with software and experimenting on people"

2
2y
Kit Sunny

@stpaultim @darius I'm not sure it did. Just this week, I had to defederate an instance because their followbot decided to follow me and draw in my content for some nebulous "new social network", and the bot's homepage was a "whitepaper" that decried how ActivityPub doesn't allow for silent follows without notification. Indeed, said developer asked for the standard to be changed to allow for following someone without their knowledge.

This hardly seems like a chilling effect.

1
2y
Replies