Created: https://community.nodebb.org/topic/b9473fc6-0091-4e6a-bf6c-98d930822c3d/creating-a-new-thread-on-a-nodebb-forum

Creating a new thread on a NodeBB forum

This is a test

@testing-ground

@julian @jesseplusplus Works fine for me. There is a difference in collection type though (others use OrderedCollection).

I've added Decodon to the list of software that publish collections of posts: https://codeberg.org/fediverse/fep/pulls/644

How it works between forums, e.g. between Discourse and NodeBB?
Can a Discourse user create a topic in NodeBB category?
Who creates/owns the context collection in this case?

If I create a topic this way, I will be the owner of the context collection. But if the conversation is to be moderated, it should be owned by the group.

Am I correct?

(there is a parallel discussion happening at https://codeberg.org/streams/streams/issues/229)

@julian Does NodeBB support creating new topics by mentioning a group/category?

I wonder how context should be assigned in this case.

@julian @mikedev Yes, if you receive an Announce(Create), and Create is not signed, then you need to retrieve this Create from its origin. When that origin server receives your signed GET request, it needs to verify that you belong to the group, but it might not have that information.

@mikedev @julian

but as I recall it didn't really work well with private groups and aspects/circles

Last time I heard about 1b12 private groups, the proposed solution was to use a "collection inclusion endpoint" to verify that actor is a member of a group

@mikedev @julian

hen conversation containers are working correctly, you never need to backfill a conversation. It is all delivered to you.

I think there is one case where backfill is necessary: public conversations that are not discovered through following (e.g. by retrieving an object by its ID).

@julian @trwnh @mikedev

neither approach conflicts with the other

I don't fully agree with this statement, because these "threading paradigms" suggest two different solutions to the problem of moderation. If the OP is the single source of truth, they can moderate the entire conversation (represented by context collection: Streams). If not, then each reply is independent and authors moderate only the direct replies (represented by replies collections: GoToSocial).

In theory two solutions can be combined, but at the cost of significantly increased complexity.

I think it's important to get an Announce, because the actor who addressed the community might be blocked by that community, or might not be a member of it (if the community is private).
You can try to retrieve the outbox of the addressed community to verify that a post was actually Announce'd

@activitypub

@julian FEP-171b has its own way to backfill, also via context, but it is a collection of activities (such as Create).
I am currently trying to figure out how to make Containers compatible with NodeBB and others.

@julian

>Contexts can provide a thorough, comprehensive way to backfill an entire conversation. This is the biggest step we can take towards tackling the “fediverse is quiet” problem.

Sure, context is useful for backfilling, but is it the biggest step? I don't think so.

With FEP-1b12 or Containers, conversations are synced by default, so there is no need for backfilling. This is more efficient too: you don't need to retrieve context periodically to get an up-to-date view.