Skip to content
Snippets Groups Projects
New look: Off

DM warning text should vary based on BE safe_dm feature

    • Closed Issue created by feld @feld

    BE has a safe_dm feature that ensure only the accounts mentioned at the beginning of a DM post get mentioned. The DM warning text should reflect this if the safe_dm feature is enabled.

    image

    Designs

      Child items ...

      2. Activity

      • Dave LiPuma assigned to @Dave

        assigned to @Dave

      • Dave LiPuma mentioned in merge request !726 (merged)

        mentioned in merge request !726 (merged)

      • Dave LiPuma
        Dave LiPuma @Dave ·
        Guest

        @feld This is ready. I checked on my own server and it worked like a charm.

      • Dave LiPuma
        Dave LiPuma @Dave ·
        Guest

        safe_dm = false

        safe_dm_false

        safe_dm = true

        safe_dm_true

        safe_dm_BE

        Edited by Dave LiPuma
      • HJ
        HJ @hj ·
        Maintainer

        can we instead just have a list of people that will be notified/able to read message instead of added confusion?

      • HJ
        HJ @hj ·
        Maintainer

        how does that work exactly, is only first mentioned user notified?

        who will get this message

        @alice, @bob, @carl, did @dane murder anyone?

        what about this

        @alice @bob @carl who the hell is @dane?

        what about this

        @alice and @bob, i need you in my office now. @carl - to security station.

      • feld
        feld @feld ·
        Author Maintainer

        I don't think anyone knows the limitations except @lambadalambda who wrote the BE code

      • HJ
        HJ @hj ·
        Maintainer

        wow, how intuitive

      • feld
        feld @feld ·
        Author Maintainer

        @alice, @bob, @carl, did @dane murder anyone?

        Unsure

        @alice @bob @carl who the hell is @dane?

        Only Alice Bob and Carl will get this message. Not Dane.

        @alice and @bob, i need you in my office now. @carl - to security station.

        I presume that only Alice will get it.

        These are strange examples though because it's not how people would address each other on this platform. Naturally you would list all recipients and then write your message. Sometimes people leave a name at the end of a [public] message to basically CC them, but the accounts preceding the message are who they intend to refer to.

        Edited by feld
      • HJ
        HJ @hj ·
        Maintainer

        i know these sound weird, just the quickest examples i could think of. I mean, "At the beginning" doesn't make it any clearer, only more confusing, so previously discussed "This message will be delivered to " is even more required IMO.

      • Dave LiPuma
        Dave LiPuma @Dave ·
        Guest

        !645 (closed)

        The one in the screenshot here?

      • feld
        feld @feld ·
        Author Maintainer

        wow, how intuitive

        We don't have a lot of options at our disposal that apply to every possible Pleroma/Mastodon client without requiring the authors of that software to change to a new API or completely reconstruct their DM flow. This is a BE solution that prevents surprises.

        The current behavior is not intuitive at all as people would expect a DM to be sent to the initial @mentions, so mentioning someone later in the message to refer to their account name about an abuse incident or some other situation that deserves privacy should not cause the message to actually get sent to that person as well.

        The entire DM situation sucks ass and the ActivityPub working group should be ashamed. :sweat:

      • lain
        lain @lambadalambda ·
        Owner

        We can get the mentioned users by using the preview api that rin added, it would be best to display the list of mentioned people.

        @hj as feld said, this is pretty much a hack to prevent accidental mentions without rewriting all clients in existence. Long term we should move to a completely different DM system.

        Also, please try to keep these discussions on non-torvalds level.

      • HJ
        HJ @hj ·
        Maintainer

        perkele. I'm just saying it's a hack and it brings even more confusion, i already mentioned situation that might happen month ago, and this makes it even worse since people will assume it works same way everywhere, including replying and switching instances (and it's not user-configurable?).

        Three major points:

        1. "In the beginning" is very ambiguous and very confusing as I mentioned, so list of mentions in post preview is a dependency for this MR, to clear up any confusion who is actually mentioned.
        2. people switching instances will never notice small difference in warning text that DMs word differently on this instance.
        3. possibility for user to switch this behaviour? I mean since we're already bringing in confusion, at least give users freedom in that regard...
        Edited by HJ
      • rinpatch
        rinpatch @rinpatch ·
        Contributor

        so list of mentions in post preview is a dependency for this MR

        Post preview was merged and provides a the same Status entity with all keys present a non-preview request would provide, so you can use it to get mentions already

        possibility for user to switch this behaviour?

        Was wondering the same thing when this got introduced, here is the reasoning to why not

      • HJ
        HJ @hj ·
        Maintainer

        It's less intuitive this way, all I can say. Any word more and lain will scold me.

      • Shpuld Shpludson mentioned in commit 8c7f765d

        mentioned in commit 8c7f765d

      • Shpuld Shpludson closed via merge request !726 (merged)

        closed via merge request !726 (merged)

      Please register or sign in to reply