2026-09-19 23:09 UTC
@julian@activitypub.space Thank you! Yes, the context-level interaction controls (we talked about them briefly near the start of the year) will most likely not be part of v1 of my document.
I am still curious whether a FEP-c0d0 lock and the interaction policy you posted are indeed equivalent given these conditions: https://docs.gotosocial.org/en/latest/federation/interaction_controls/#implicit-assumptions I'm assuming no.
In my draft text I leave it open whether an interaction constraint is imposed by the post author or a moderator. Maybe this distinction should be explicit.
Replies (2)
-
@silverpill@mitra.social 2026-09-20 19:52
@julian@fietkau.social @julian the context-level interaction controls This is documented in FEP-171b: Conversation Containers. @technical-discussion
-
@julian@activitypub.space 2026-09-19 23:49
FEP-c0d0: Context Locking @julian@fietkau.social the implicit assumptions AIUI: OP always has ability to modify mentioned and inReplyTo are always able to reply These are implicit to microblog style interactions and would not apply in a threaded context. It's a difference in delegation of moderation power to category/forum level moderators and admins. Likely worth noting in the FEP as well.