sharing vs. following
if you start sharing with someone your profile is shared with that person (respectively the owner of this account).
in my opinion this is not necessary. there should be an option to follow an account without sharing your profile.
i think there are 2 options to handle this:
1. allow users to create one profile for each aspect (problem: which profile is shown to people which are in more than one aspect?)
2. differentiate between sharing and following => sharing means also sharing your profile. following means sharing without sharing your profile.
[deactivated account] started a proposal Fri 11 Mar 2016
Should sharing be split into **sharing** and **following**? Closed Mon 11 Apr 2016
I'll cite Jason's comment (which for me hits the nail on the head):
> I’ve always thought the way diaspora does sharing/following is hugely broken.
> Sharing and following should be different things. And also I should be able to share, without following.
> In short;
* Adding someone to an aspect would grant them access to your profile - you are now sharing with them
* Following someone does not give access to the person - you are only following their public posts, or whatever posts they are exposing to you.
|Agree - 15|
|Abstain - 15|
|Disagree - 15|
|Block - 15|
Tue 15 Mar 2016
This view of sharing vs. following reflects how I use d*. Bots and blogs don't need access to my profile, however I might want to get their posts.
Tue 29 Mar 2016
I also see the problem of complicated stream queries. In case of this question I'm for speed over data privacy.