Not public reshare
Tekarihoken
Public
Seen by 120
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.
fourier Sat 28 Feb 2015 7:57PM
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.
Tekarihoken Sun 1 Mar 2015 2:30PM
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).
lukas Sun 1 Mar 2015 5:09PM
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
Deleted account Sun 1 Mar 2015 8:24PM
Seriously, I don't see why this can't be a part of this idea and why you continue to comment this...
Poll Created Tue 21 Jul 2015 6:14PM
reshare reach control Closed Fri 31 Jul 2015 6:08PM
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.
Results
| Results | Option | % of points | Voters | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
Agree | 50.0% | 6 |
|
| Abstain | 8.3% | 1 |
|
|
| Disagree | 33.3% | 4 |
|
|
| Block | 8.3% | 1 |
|
|
| Undecided | 0% | 135 |
|
12 of 147 people have participated (8%)
Roland Haeder
Tue 21 Jul 2015 8:56PM
More control over your privacy?
Globulle
Wed 22 Jul 2015 7:42AM
For this feature to be complete, I think one should also be able to add a message with it ( see this thread )
Globulle
Wed 22 Jul 2015 7:44AM
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 )
Sean Tilley
Wed 22 Jul 2015 3:35PM
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?
Deleted account
Fri 24 Jul 2015 7:43AM
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.
Jason Robinson
Fri 24 Jul 2015 8:51AM
As said in a few comments. This would be a repost, not a reshare.
Jonne Haß
Fri 24 Jul 2015 9:28AM
We should consider replacing the entire reshare concept if it doesn't work well, not retrofit new stuff into it.
Steffen van Bergerem
Thu 30 Jul 2015 1:44PM
Let's separate the federation code from the d* core code before talking about federation protocol changes.
EsΠ Wed 22 Jul 2015 8:15AM
@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! :)
EsΠ Thu 23 Jul 2015 11:46AM
@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
Jason Robinson Thu 23 Jul 2015 3:55PM
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.
Deleted account Fri 24 Jul 2015 7:44AM
FYI : That's exactly why I proposed this including on this thread.
EsΠ Fri 24 Jul 2015 2:49PM
@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! ;)
Globulle Fri 24 Jul 2015 3:41PM
@es , I've made a new proposal to modify the reshare feature as to address most issues (including the one on github).
Some 1 Sun 10 Jan 2016 11:02AM
I would also really like this!
Deleted User Fri 22 Jan 2016 11:44AM
As long as what is going to happen to a post is clear then that is important.
goob · Sat 28 Feb 2015 6:16PM
It's already on Github: https://github.com/diaspora/diaspora/issues/1644