This is probably the wrong place for this, but is there any intention to have something like super communities, where the same community exists on multiple instances but is treated like just one?

Ie, if you sub to asklemmy on world, you see content from whatever other servers have asklemmy.

  • GBU_28@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 month ago

    The way I’d want it would be user built super communities. Like, I decide what groups to conglomerate…and no one else is the wiser.

    • MagicShel@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      It would be great to implement client side. I just don’t know how the comment system would work. Do you post to 4 communities all at once? Obviously moderation issues if it’s a single comment linked to 4 servers, but if it’s not then people who don’t have a client that combines duplicate comments on duplicate communities would see a bunch of garbage spam.

      I guess I’m not saying it’s inconceivable that this feature could be done well, but the obstacles seem really tall. I can’t even imagine how I would implement this.

      • GBU_28@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Good points. I’d make it totally client side so my actions with the fediverse are atomic and normal. At most I could specify which community in my supergroup the post will land on, but on the intake direction, I have one stop shopping for multiple communities. When I enter a post and comment on it, it acts like any other. The core premise is client side aggregation, not server side multiposting or anything

        Edit I will say it is annoying when you see someone shotgun every similar community across the fediverse with their post, just trying to get it seen. I do not believe my client side grouping helps with that at all. Some sort of dedupe would be required, and thats scope creep