I plan on experimenting with the suggestions posted here. That way I can narrow down where the problem is

The live website works on desktop and mobile. The offline folder works well on desktop, but it has issues on mobile, such as the search bar not working

That would work

I’ll check it out

Thank you, I’ll try those

deleted by creator

Yep I think the defederation point is the big one which causes the idea to break down. I’ll edit the post to better reflect my thoughts now

Thank you!

Hope it helps :)

Look, honestly: if you want Facebook ot Twitter, go back to them.

This post was to talk about the merits/drawbacks of a potential change, and the constructive comments on the post have been helpful for that. Some of the other ‘solutions’ that have been posted here feel even more antithetical to the idea of decentralization (ex. redirecting upvotes, having communities follow other communities) so I was looking for a compromise that would address some of the annoyances without making the site another centralized platform. The intent was to allow users to choose how they want to link cross posts together, rather than having the community (or an app/frontend) make the decision for them. We’ve also been seeing users naturally gravitate to a few instances/communities, so I was looking for ways to redirect some of that traffic back to lesser known spaces.

Regardless, I appreciate the comment. Reading the perspectives on this post helped me see how locking the post completely would cause more issues and annoyances than it would help with. A simple “we are discussing X over on this post, feel free to join” seems like the better compromise.

that’s fair :)

Everyone who’s subscribed to the same communities will see all of each others’ comments.

This still relies on everyone using the same app/front-end.

I guess I’m thinking about how it would be helpful in more general cases. If someone has an issue with a FOSS app, and they ask about it in two small communities, it would be much better to have the troubleshooting discussion in one place rather than have both communities missing part of the context.

Ultimately in your example, the user can still make both posts, this doesn’t change that. It just directs the comments to one post’s comment section rather than having it spread out.

Still it’s good to think about cases where OP tries to abuse the system. Would a good middle ground just be the first implementation then? For OP to link to the post that they want to be the main discussion thread, but people are free to ignore that if they want.

I agree, instance assistant (our extension actually!) handles this, but it would be much better to have it exist natively.

this proposal would give more controls to the bigger communities

what are the concerns that come to mind?

I’d rather just have different communities

All the individual communities would continue to exist as they do right now. When it makes sense for a post to have a deeper discussion, users can lock and redirect accordingly

This works for viewing all the comments so far, but it doesn’t solve the discussion aspect since commentors from each community won’t be seeing or responding to the other comments. This is a bigger issue with smaller communities, where they’d mostly be top level comments / chains with minimal depth from each smaller community. Yes you can see all the comments, but the discussion quality is poor.

It’s also not as helpful when the automation fails. Something I’ve found is that the ‘crosspost’ field starts to get crowded on posts that link to a popular website. Combining comment sections from ALL of those posts isn’t as useful as having some intentional action from the OP.

A key aspect about this proposal is that it requires the OP to do something. If it doesn’t make sense for a community (ex. different intents behind the Politics communities), then OP shouldn’t lock their post. If OP does it anyway, then you can downvote that post.

deleted by creator

For smaller extensions, you can start by looking at the manifest.json as this file is the entry point. You can see which part of the code needs access to ‘everything’ and go from there.

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Add-ons/WebExtensions/manifest.json

For example, with Instance Assistant for Lemmy, you need to give access to all sites because it needs to run on any Lemmy site and that’s not something you can hardcode in.

This doesn’t answer the Linux part, but on FDroid there’s something similar as “Retro Stack”