He he. 😈
Let's see if I'm calling @Vitor Pamplona 's bluff, or if he actually implemented #kind24 public messages.
Login to reply
Replies (50)
Lol. I can see it but replies are broken :(
if you send a message i can reply probably...
Doh!
Well, 50% is a good start.
I can see it and reply to it, but it's still in PR, so we're even.
Just occured to me, that I don't even know how the replies work for this. 😂
Alexandria let's you 1111 back at any event, except kind 1, but does thing even have replies, or is it cooler to just air-reply with a kind 24 back?
Maybe it would be even better. I don't know.. I am having some doubts about not having a "thread" on this kind
I air-replied back. Adding a Public Messages tab, so that it's easier to see them in order, like the Japanese relays do, with air-reply feeds.
Did it work? Can you see it?
The feed is now chronological, but allows for kind 1111 replies.
I just right-align my messages and left-align everyone else's, and the threads appear below the respective event.
i can't see the note of test if a login with her npub, but i can see the note of vitor and probably reply, but if a login with vitor npub i don't see the message so i can't reply
you have just piqued my curiosity to see what this looks like
But then you have to mix kind 1111 and kind 24 in the same "chat"?
Sure, but I'm assuming most people will just air-reply. Threading doesn't add much, but always supporting kind 1111 is Alex standard practice. Makes sure someone who's client doesn't support a kind can still respond.
It looks like TREX from @cloud fodder , but the messages don't get mixed into the social feed.
I tested with an single e-tag to point to the parent. But I think you are right, kind 1111 could be better. But then I am not sure if they should be displayed in chronological order, because the threading features of 1111 might make this very complicated. They would be just as regular Kind 1 threads then
It also requires kind 24 implementers to code 1111, which I am not sure it should be required. I wanted to make something very simple. 🤔
Ok, so if we want to get context of a conversation we load everything from user to P-user and from P-user to user?
What happens if another p-tag is added. Do we just blend all the convesations with multiple p tags or do we create "rooms" for each individual p-set?
You can see, I filtered out the convo with @il_lost_
worked with Victor
Also, I don't think you are sending these replies to my public inbox relays. I am receiving them by luck of having the same relay list.
Yeah, I need to add that.
I'm trying to picture this. If the 24 has multiple p-tags, that just means that note goes to lots of different npubs' message feeds and/or notifications.
If they click the ↩️ reply button, on that 24, then we don't create create a real reply, we just include all of the same p-tags in the next 24. We could have a Reply/ReplyToAll differentiation, like with e-mail. 🤔
For orientation, we could just include a reply-snippet, at the top, like Jumble does. That's much simpler than threading replies, and doesn't require an additional kind. Could just put it in an optional "context" tag, or something, like 9802 highlights do.
People just want some indication that something is in reference or response to something else.
They can then click on that snippet and go to that context-event, if they want.
I guess that reply-snippet could also be an "e" tag, but that would lead lazy developers to thread everything and then people would quickly hate the hell-threads in their notifications.
the whole thing of mentioning every npub in the path back up to the OP is kinda crazy
a subscription that looks for e tags to the OPs would work the same way also, without being a hellthread.
idk which empty skull came up with the idea and then how the fuck it became convention but it needs to stop
Yeah, I constantly see notifications for side-threads I'm not in.
I guess I need some way to add or remove a "p" tag, when replying, to sort of drag someone into a conversation, or remove someone. I could display who was all included in a list, and have "+" and "-" button.
Again, the Jumble UI for this is nice.
I don't want to do e-tags. The temptation to thread it would be irresistable.
It would quickly end up kind 1 in the notifications tab.
lol
nothing wrong with direct reply and OP references, otherwise it's floating in space with no context
email you quote, do you want to replicate that pattern?
I'd rather have nothing. I know how bad most Nostr developers are and they would burn the concept, and then the users would demand we remove it.
op and direct reply are fine, IMO, and mentioning the npub of the direct reply but mentioning the whole path to the op is retarded
normal threaded discussions only link the post into the thread and trigger a notification for the user who was replied to. not the whole damn path up the tree
the structure is a doubly linked list/tree, that's reasonable
the mention of the next user up should be default off but a button "notify of reply"
The whole point is that the discussion is not threaded. It's air replies.
ah, so instead of creating these tags the reply button is the quote button
makes sense. would also be kinda cool in that the relay hints are in there as well
I'm not going to do any references or replies, at all. I can already see y'all turning my nice, clean UI into spaghetti.
+1 ACK on this concept. approved.
this is like email replies except more compact because the reader can fetch the reference
it would mean that seeing other than the single path up would be hard to do as well. you'd click on what you reply to, if it's a reply, you click on that, etc etc ad lib to fade
He already has quotes for context in the spec. I didn't see that. That's okay. Yeah, quote-replies, no threads.
compromising one's vision is never the right way.
please do this thing, i would like to see how it works
i like it because it ends the whole tree below triggering notifications pointlessly
I'll just do "q" tags and show them as a snippet, that's also a hyperlink to that event in the feed.
Although, you could get around that with a filter, by saying,
🔗 Show me the chain.
That's not a true thread, but would display them in order.
yeah, also you could have a setting "don't show quote replies from follows if you mute the quoted npub"
this would end thread notification trolling
and bury the thread references in a menu button that is in the overflow ...
With this architecture, you're only in the game If someone specifically wants you to be. The side-threads are actually new convos that splintered off and only appear in those person's notifications.