michael/delightful-fediverse-apps
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://codeberg.org/fediverse/delightful-fediverse-apps.git synced 2024-12-26 22:37:19 -08:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

Create FediverseParty agreement

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
lostinlight 2019-12-29 15:31:36 +00:00
parent 63459f676c
commit d9104a9a69
1 changed files with 15 additions and 0 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

15
FediverseParty-agreement.md Normal file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
1. Account - schould have one (long, strong) password known to all the editors.
2. It must have rules that we all agree upon and list somewhere for own reference. For starters:
a) posts dedicated to anything *Fediverse related but not violating rule (b) - new software announcements / reshares, welcoming any Fedi newcomer movements (TwitterExodusScotland etc etc), promoting Fedi projects, posting useful bits of info about Fedi (nicely formated with points •, emojis, paragraphs, etc).
b) posts should not be explicitly politically / religiously / etc aligned because not all editors will have the same attitude towards various controversial Fedi topics / dramas (better leave such posts for one's personal accounts)
c) probably best to end each post from this account with "by @nickname" note, so that readers know who they're talking / whom each individual answer in the thread represents
*By Fediverse we currently agree to count software using any of the four protocols. Which means we won't post about XMPP, Matrix or any other federating things from this account.
3. Software. I vote for Mastodon / Glitch-soc instance. As much as I'd love Friendica or Hubzilla extra features, they sometimes catch weird bugs that may prevent messages reaching Mastodon - which is the biggest source of our target audience, as of today. Gitch-soc allows long posts (up to 10.000), more pall variants (I think?), bookmarks - it's more flexible than Mastodon and ensures solid Mastodon interoperability.
4. Strypey initially said such an account may be useful for DM-ing Fedi developers and having some "official" private conversations ("officially representing fediverse.party"). I think it's OK (?) but since several people will have access to the account we should may be decide that if someone starts a DM thread about some Fediverse/Party question, others will read it but won't answer in the thread unless they are the one who initiated it. Or else our correspondents may be a bit confused who they're talking to. Such DMs also require a "by @nickname" signature at the end, I think, not to be anonymous for the correspondent.