Asklemmy

43831 readers

724 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

Should Mastodon users be able to create threads on Lemmy? (lemmy.ml)

submitted 2 years ago by nutomic@lemmy.ml to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

24 comments fedilink hide all child comments

There have been some requests to make it possible for Mastodon users to create threads on Lemmy. At the moment this is not possible because Mastodon cant set the title field which is mandatory in Lemmy. The same problem affects other projects like Pleroma or Friendica (where title is optional).

It is unlikely that Mastodon would make any change in this regard, so a workaround in Lemmy would be necessary. I implemented such a workaround which makes the title optional when receiving a federated post, and uses the first line of the content instead. This workaround could also be made configurable per instance or per community.

But to be honest I am not sure the workaround is a good idea in general, as it could result in bad titles, and generally more low-quality posts. Thats why I want to know what the community thinks about it.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] dessalines@lemmy.ml 17 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I think its a good idea obvi. Its a collision between the microblogging / twitter-style that masto and pleroma employ(that have no title, only a body), vs the link-aggregator style (which has a title, and an optional body).

Both platforms should try to resolve the missing fields in whatever way possible, even if that means extrapolating bodies to titles and vice versa.

[–] 0x1C3B00DA@lemmy.ml 6 points 2 years ago

Both platforms should try to resolve the missing fields in whatever way possible, even if that means extrapolating bodies to titles and vice versa.

Super agree. I don't even see this as a collision. The post we're commenting on doesn't have a link so doesn't even cleanly fit as a link-aggregator post; it's closer to a blog post. But I don't think these distinctions matter. Arbitrary categories about what types of posts are allowed just limit things for no reason. I can understand developers needing to focus, but in this case it seems easy to take a microblog post (Note) and display it within Lemmy's ui by resolving missing fields, like you said.

I'm always in favor of more integration. My hope for the fediverse is every software accepts posts from every other software.