Recent searches
Search options
What do you think? Do you want to see a local timeline in 
#WriteFreely? https://discuss.write.as/t/local-timeline/206
Heh, this is pretty much what I imagined the "local timeline" on WF being -- a cross between a directory of users who wanted to be listed on it, and a stream of the most recent posts from them. https://mastodon.social/@Gargron/101192194776647834
@write_as Yes, yes I do.
@mike @CrowderSoup @dansup Great!
Some follow-up questions:
- Should it be publicly visible, or only visible to logged in users? Maybe an instance-wide admin option?
- Should all users on an instance be included in it by default? Opt-in? Opt-out? (Especially if the timeline is public)
- Would you expect to be able to interact with posts in the timeline (e.g. follow, reply, boost)?
If a post is public it should appear on the public timeline I think. So have an option on each post, and then a profile setting to configure your default (public or private). Public timeline should be visible to anyone, not just logged in users. Logged in users should be able to curate their timeline (only see posts from people you follow). I'd want to be able to reply (comment?), Favorite, or boost a post.
- I think there should be an admin setting to make the timeline public or not, as there is in Mastodon. Also, an admin setting for the DEFAULT permissions for posts. Each profile should be able to override that default at both the profile level and the post level.
- I would expect to interact on a limited basis. Follow certainly. I'm not sure about how boosting is going to work. Reply, no. I think that would encourage people to reply without reading.
@CrowderSoup I have to confess, I have no idea how Tumblr works.
@write_as @mike @CrowderSoup @dansup i say all of the above options :)
@geotechland @mike @CrowderSoup @dansup @erosdiscordia @angedestenebres @tekmav@mastodon.technology @yahananxie Thanks for the feedback, everyone! Taking all of this in consideration, especially for future improvements.
For now, we'll have a very basic version of this in today's v0.6 release. Here's a preview: https://pencil.writefree.ly/read
And more details: https://github.com/writeas/writefreely/commit/25a68d0c0e24495ac75e8b67d3e901eec6578059
@write_as @geotechland @mike @dansup @erosdiscordia @angedestenebres @tekmav @yahananxie
Even more reason to give @write_as a go!
@write_as This looks pretty rad. Opt-in is great, and finding people by interest really would be the next level.
@write_as and I say yes too ^^
1. A way for the instance admin to turn a public stream on and off
2. A way for the instance admin to set the public stream as the default landing "page"
3. A way for the instance admin to set if the public stream is opt-in or opt-out
4. End-users can set their Write Freely blogs as opt-in or opt-out on a per blog basis
For the future:
5. A way for instance admins to set different "collective" streams. We have the "public stream", then they can set, for example, a "NaNo Stream" which can be set to either public or private, and end-users can opt-in or opt-out on a per blog basis.
I remembered something. The idea I have in mind is something similar to #b2evolution and #quamplures blog software. They both have a multi-blog system wherein a blog can be set to pull in information from another blog within the same installation.
So for example:
Blog 1 also displays posts from Blog 2, 3, 4
Blog 2 also displays posts from Blog 4 and 5
Blog 5 is a solo blog
Blog 6 a solo blog
In this approach, of course the setting was on the blog itself. In a stream approach, a stream can still be treated as a blog similarly to how b2evolution and quamplures are doing it. The difference being, instead of setting a blog to pull from Blog X, a blog can be set to be a "stream" type. The other blogs in the same installation can then choose to be displayed there.
The way I'm seeing it is this way:
Blog 1: instance admin sets it as "stream" type, "public", and as default landing page of the instance
Blog 2: instance admin sets it as "stream" type, "public", with name and description "NaNoWriMo"
Blog 3: instance admin sets it as "stream" type, "private", with name and description "R18"
User A for Blog 1: chooses "NaNoWriMo" stream
User A for Blog 2: chooses "R18"
User B for Blog 1: chooses "public" stream
Users can not set their blogs to be a "stream" type. Or maybe they can although at the moment, I can't think of any reason why an end-user should have the ability to create "stream" type blogs.
In this setup, it basically opens up a whole lot of possibilities, use cases, and setup for each instance. For example, in one of use cases I want to implement, I want to create an instance wherein I can have my own #Wattpad without the unwanted, overarching, unlimited use, perpetual, license grants in Wattpad's ToS.