Loomio

Not public reshare

T
Tekarihoken Public Seen by 406

I would like to suggest to add the possibility to reshare something without posting it as public.

According to me the fact to add the possibility to choose the aspect used with the reshare can add a very big value to D*.

From my user experience : there is a lot of thing that I am not resharing because I don't want to set it public : it is a little bit annoying.

E

EsΠ started a proposal Tue 21 Jul 2015

reshare reach control Closed Fri 31 Jul 2015

This thread sadly seems to be dead, but there is demand for an implementation of "reshare privacy" as you can see here as well as on github and in the d* community outside these forums.

Therefore I propose that the confirmation window asking whether one actually wants to reshare the selected post be modified to show a dropdown menu, just like the one you use to modify your original posts' reach. This menu would contain all your aspects, "public" being the default option.

I believe this would enhace d*'s user-friendliness without being an overly extensive change.

Agree - 6
Abstain - 1
Disagree - 4
Block - 1
12 people have voted (8%)
E

EsΠ
Agree
Tue 21 Jul 2015

DU

[deactivated account]
Agree
Tue 21 Jul 2015

T

Tekarihoken
Agree
Tue 21 Jul 2015

RH

Roland Haeder
Agree
Tue 21 Jul 2015

More control over your privacy?

DU

[deactivated account]
Agree
Tue 21 Jul 2015

E

Elm
Agree
Wed 22 Jul 2015

G

Globulle
Abstain
Wed 22 Jul 2015

For this feature to be complete, I think one should also be able to add a message with it ( see this thread )

G

Globulle
Abstain
Wed 22 Jul 2015

For this feature to be complete, I think one should also be able to add a message with it (see this thread: https://www.loomio.org/d/cX7rqFSw/adding-text-mention-on-top-of-a-reshared-post )

ST

Sean Tilley
Disagree
Wed 22 Jul 2015

While it's not a bad idea, I feel like there's too much potential to change the permissions settings of a post's reshare. Can we assure that private posts would never be affected by this kind of functionality?

A

Augier
Disagree
Fri 24 Jul 2015

I find this a bad idea as is. Changing the visibility changes the nature of the post, which makes it a new post. So, this shouldn't be a *reshare.

JR

Jason Robinson
Disagree
Fri 24 Jul 2015

As said in a few comments. This would be a repost, not a reshare.

JH

Jonne Haß
Disagree
Fri 24 Jul 2015

We should consider replacing the entire reshare concept if it doesn't work well, not retrofit new stuff into it.

SVB

Steffen van Bergerem
Block
Thu 30 Jul 2015

Let's separate the federation code from the d* core code before talking about federation protocol changes.

DU

[deactivated account] Fri 27 Feb 2015

+1

A

Augier Fri 27 Feb 2015

Heu... Duplicate !?

T

Tekarihoken Sat 28 Feb 2015

Hum this is not a duplicate .

A

Augier Sat 28 Feb 2015

I think this is.

E

Elm Sat 28 Feb 2015

Hello, in the discussion linked by Augier it is what he named "augmented reshare" that would include the ability to change the visibility, plus other things. I agree with Tekarihoken tthat the ability to simply reshare the same post to a limited aspect would be usefull.

A

Augier Sat 28 Feb 2015

Yeah, but maybe it can be discussed in the other thread instead of always opening a new one !?

T

Tekarihoken Sat 28 Feb 2015

@Augier : First : I haven't seen your post yesterday.

Added to that : your solution is given to a closed proposition that is dealing with the problem of resharing occurence not about resharing visibility.

I don't see the interest to mix every subject that is dealing with resharing into a single topic.

Added to that your proposition do not solve my problem : it do not permit to reshare an original post with a customized visibility and is producing the same result as copy/paste.

A

Augier Sat 28 Feb 2015

...
Seriously ? You really don't read ?
The thread is called "reshares" it is about reshares discussing.

Plus, you never do researches before onpening a thread on a forum ?

T

Tekarihoken Sat 28 Feb 2015

I am not sure that you have understood the philosophy of Loomio.
Loomio is decision-making oriented.This is not a forum with infinite thread. Discussing about different subject into a single one is stupid : the subjects should be decoupled.

Soo yes I have done a search and I have found the indicated thread. I have also noticed that the topic that was dealing with resharing occurence. That is why I have decided to open a new one in order to avoid the confusions.

JR

Jason Robinson Sat 28 Feb 2015

TBH, I think this belongs on github as it is purely a feature request - not really much to discuss since the wish seems very clear.

G

goob Sat 28 Feb 2015

F

fourier Sat 28 Feb 2015

I would vote for this, the default public reshare makes it insecure - i don't want all internet to know if the I reshared something, only my aspects should know.

T

Tekarihoken Sun 1 Mar 2015

Thank you @goob. It seems that there is a lot of people that is waiting for this feature. Is there a technical reason why nobody has already implemented it ? (or it is due to a lack of developer).

DU

[deactivated account] Sun 1 Mar 2015

i think this is important, just because of the fact i don't want to post something public just for sharing it with my people. copy and repost limited is annoying. so i'd vote for this

+1

A

Augier Sun 1 Mar 2015

Seriously, I don't see why this can't be a part of this idea and why you continue to comment this...

E

EsΠ Wed 22 Jul 2015

@globulle I also think that is a nice idea, but bundeling different proposals into a big one makes the democratic process a lot slower, since it's way harder to find majorities that will agree with all the details of a complex proposal. Precise, smaller steps are the better way to handle this, I think. In the thread you linked, it seems peeps didnt quite understand your intentions. The best strategy might be to make another proposal for adding a field to write a message in on the reshare comfirmation window, over at your old thread. This way, our ideas could run parallel and everyone knows exactly what they're voting for! :)

E

EsΠ Thu 23 Jul 2015

@deadsuperhero Thanks for bringing that up, I admittedly didn't think about it. But since private posts are not resharable in the first place, I don't see reason for concern there (unless I misunderstood your meaning...?). If the feature I suggested would be implemented as I said in the reshare-confirmation-dialog, you couldn't possibly access it for a private post. I hope you reconsider your decision! https://wiki.diasporafoundation.org/FAQ_for_users#Who_can_reshare_my_private_post.3F

JR

Jason Robinson Thu 23 Jul 2015

I'm not sure it's a good idea to offer tools to move content created by others as public to private. The person whose post is reshared might not be able to see the reshare, which to me would be odd.

A

Augier Fri 24 Jul 2015

FYI : That's exactly why I proposed this including on this thread.

E

EsΠ Fri 24 Jul 2015

@augier @jasonrobinson I find this definition completely arbitrary. Since @jhass has a fair point though (although I personally think this could be achieved through step-by-step-reforms just as well and maybe more easily for reasons I stated above), let's take the raw material from your old thread, Augier, and make it voteable. Since the most controversial part of your reshare-revision is the one-reshared-post-floods-stream-issue, let's all go to https://github.com/diaspora/diaspora/issues/4219 and collect some ideas. I'm a complete boon in regard to coding, so I need some activity by you people here! ;)

G

Globulle Fri 24 Jul 2015

@es , I've made a new proposal to modify the reshare feature as to address most issues (including the one on github).

S1

Some 1 Sun 10 Jan 2016

I would also really like this!

DU

[deactivated account] Fri 22 Jan 2016

As long as what is going to happen to a post is clear then that is important.