Post by @julian@fietkau.social

2026-09-18 20:09 UTC

@julian@activitypub.space There is potential overlap with interaction policies here. Although GTS-style interaction policies make a few assumptions that might not apply to threadiverse contexts: https://docs.gotosocial.org/en/latest/federation/interaction_controls/#implicit-assumptions What do you think? Maybe FEP-c0d0 is a “harder” lock. People can still like and share locked threads, yes? Off topic: My outline for the interaction controls work in the T&S task force mentions context-aware policies as a tentative non-goal. https://github.com/swicg/activitypub-trust-and-safety/issues/159#issuecomment-5348012095 NodeBB gets a shoutout.

Replies (1)

@julian@activitypub.space 2026-09-19 14:08

FEP-c0d0: Context Locking @julian@fietkau.social yes, I was aware of some overlap with GtS interaction policies/reply-controls, although this is less fine grained and isn't tied to the posting user — it's scope is actually larger! This might be done at the moderator/admin level, and would be functionally equivalent to: [... rest of the interaction policy ...], "canReply": { "automaticApproval": [], "manualApproval": [] }, [... rest of the interaction policy ...] or whatever shorthand is available (canReply: false?) This FEP is also part of the resolvable contexts tree of FEPs, so they don't refer to post objects themselves, but the entire comment tree. That means if a topic is locked, you can't reply to any of its children either, at least relative to the context/OP's POV.

Open ##5336175