#indieweb 2020-12-03

2020-12-03 UTC
lostinthesauce joined the channel
#
lostinthesauce
hey
alex11, jeremycherfas, toupain1, qa5_, [tantek], avalos, NinjaTrappeur and [Raphael_Luckom] joined the channel
[KevinMarks], seekr and samwilson joined the channel
#
alex11
https://dweb.archive.org/details/home seems to be the real one?
[chrisaldrich] joined the channel
#
alex11
also sorry if i'm annoying at all, i really don't know how to talk to people on the internet, i should maybe just stay muted
[fluffy] joined the channel
#
[fluffy]
We’re all making it up as we go
#
alex11
not really seeing people for months also does not help my social skills, thanks pandemic
[Emma_Humphries] joined the channel
#
[Emma_Humphries]
I'm starting to play around with Gemini. I have an instance up, and I like the Lagrange browser.
#
alex11
yeah, i'm using lagrange as well
#
[Emma_Humphries]
there's an emoji bug the maintainer is aware of, but other than that, it's nice
#
[Emma_Humphries]
and I was able to suss out the feed format which solderpunk advocated for
Seirdy, antonior[m], [snarfed], jacky, bleb, KartikPrabhu, rrix, markopasha, [asuh], schmudde, [Rose] and swentel joined the channel
#
petermolnar
I honestly hope that those who decide to jump on gemini at least have the decency to honour gopher and run a phlog as well.
#
petermolnar
given it's nearly the same thing, except for tls
lahacker, [Murray], rmdes_1, thelounge244787, ethanyoo, [KevinMarks], rmdes_, [jgmac1106], swentel, [Rose], schmudde, PetriBot, oodani, rhiaro, gxt, [Raphael_Luckom] and seekr joined the channel
#
petermolnar
across the past weeks I circled back to questions around the identity of indieweb itself and I may have finally distilled it into a question: is our main objective to liberate people from social media by allowing them to experience at least the same set of features, or is it to provide an alternative to social media, in which the features currently existing in social media are less important, than the features missing, such as personal
#
[Raphael_Luckom]
And, to prevent a "consensus" conversation, it might be useful to substitute my / your (individual) for "our" in that question
#
jeremycherfas
I think everyone's answer is going to be different. For example, I am not in the least bit interested in stories, so I watched the discussion unfold here with a sense of detached amusement.
#
jeremycherfas
I also don't care that much about preserving my tweets on my own site, because I scoop them up with pinboard.in.
#
jeremycherfas
But I do like webmentions going back and forth, and I would like to be able to POSSE to Instagram.
#
petermolnar
[Raphael_Luckom]: it is kind of a consensus question though: think the two ideas - focus on existing vs focus on missing - are, in a way, go against eachother.
#
[Raphael_Luckom]
my answer would be a little of both and neither. My goal has nothing to do with a particular set of features--it's to give people the same intuitive understanding of the internet that they have about their neighborhood--that when they see a technical decision, they recognize it as a human decision and not a physical law.
#
[Raphael_Luckom]
fair enough
#
jeremycherfas
Agreed, they go against each other, and there are powerful voices making themselves heard. But the conclusions aren't prescriptive.
seekr joined the channel
#
petermolnar
[Raphael_Luckom]: I mean no offense, but what you wrote is quite vague for me. Could you please give me an example?
#
[Raphael_Luckom]
from using a competing product. A human decision, not a physical law. We see decisions like that all over the internet, but I believe that most people don't recognize that they are decisions, and instead think that they are based on inherent technical limitations.
#
[Raphael_Luckom]
I think that most people I know, if they put a generic cartridge of ink in their printer, and the printer didn't work, they would think "this ink cartridge doesn't work in this printer" meaning "there is some reason based in physical reality why this is not a valid part of this system" my goal is that they would recognize in that situation that they are encountering an anticompetitive decision by the printer manufacturer to prevent them
#
aaronpk
I don't see why these two ideas are mutually exclusive
qa5 joined the channel
#
[Raphael_Luckom]
which two?
#
petermolnar
[Raphael_Luckom]: what you're writing isn't always true; for example one really shouldn't use dye based ink in pigment based printers
#
[Raphael_Luckom]
why do you think that is a useful objection to raise?
#
aaronpk
petermolnar's focus on existing features or providing an alternative
#
petermolnar
aaronpk: exclusive, no, but those card ideas from [chrisaldrich] yesterday (#indieweb-meta) got me thinking that what if certain approaches are not really based in reality. Say indieweb's current main focus is presenting an option to anything social media can do at the moment, so people could use their site without needing to sacrifice anything - but what if people keep using social media for some other reasons that we don't see?
#
petermolnar
Tonnes of features are completely new to social media - stories being one. Meaning that people who predate the feature never really relied on it, thus we replicating it might be futile in the eyes of trying to provide an alternative.
#
petermolnar
On the other hand, there are features nearly completely missing from most silos, such as basic themes, which might actually be a thing people feel the lack of, and could indeed drive them for other options.
#
petermolnar
(tell me if I'm becoming too meta.)
#
petermolnar
(it is also possible that I'm asking philosophical questions that can't ever be answered)
[Murray] joined the channel
#
[Murray]
I've always thought of the main focus as simply being self-ownership and control over your own data. Part of that will be providing tools to enable digital behaviours that can currently only happen behind walls (i.e. silo features); part of that can be devising entirely new methods and functionality that people want
#
[Murray]
It feels like focusing on it purely as "opposition" to corporate social media is just a trap
#
aaronpk
I think you're just focusing too much on the recent exploration of stories. It's not that all of IndieWeb rushes to replicate the latest feature of a silo, but it is definitely interesting to analyze new features and see how people use them, and one way to do that is to try to replicate
#
jeremycherfas
Th,e theme question, I think, relates directly to whether people perceive their presence on a social site as "theirs" or "the site's".
#
jeremycherfas
I'd be interested to know whether the post-MySpace generation has any idea that a place like Twitter could look different for each person.
#
jeremycherfas
micro.blog took a fair while to implement themes.
#
[Raphael_Luckom]
my gmail still has a ninjas theme from when I was like 18
#
aaronpk
I forgot about gmail themes
#
petermolnar
jeremycherfas: re "theirs" vs "the site's": months ago a friend of mine sadly started to slide down the covid conpiracies road and asked me if I think it's ok that FB is censoring their post. She was completely stunned when I said: sure, yes. It's owned by someone else, it's not your site. In short: most people, at the moment, do think it's theirs all the time.
#
jeremycherfas
And yet, they can't make it look like anything of theirs, apart from paying with a banner image.
rmdes_, gxt and [chrisaldrich] joined the channel
#
[chrisaldrich]
What is plurality?
#
Loqi
Encouraging a plurality of projects with a self-motivated incentive to interoperate is a key principle of the indie web, in contrast to monoculture efforts which require or even encourage everyone to install the same software, or use the same online service, in order to interoperate https://indieweb.org/plurality
#
[chrisaldrich]
Plurality covers portions of the question. It's not going to be the case that everyone has the same needs/wants/desires. How can you design a system that works for everyone?
#
[chrisaldrich]
One of the biggest values I see is that of a common "dial tone" that can potentially connect everyone regardless of the particular design or specific functionality they need.
#
[chrisaldrich]
I carry an unnecessary amount of cognitive load trying to remember which of 50 services a particular friend is on to check in and say hello. If the cost to the person on the system was as high as it is for having a phone and a phone connection, all the social media services would interoperate.
#
petermolnar
plurality, while I agree with it, in this context, really sounded like "we are everything and nothing" which is very zen, but doesn't provide anything to grasp either :). The common "dial tone" is an interesting analogy, which I'd love, but I know that the dial tone is different per country - when I'm calling from the UK to Hungary, it quite obviously changes.
#
petermolnar
OK, so more details on the why I'm asking what I'm asking: if one reads our wiki, on first read it looks anti-silo - hence the brushing with, for example, aral's followers, for whom our ideas turn out to be not radical enough on second read, at which point they find the excessive documentation on silo features. While I understand the benefit of this, I keep wondering if it's worth it, instead of focusing on the solutions done by someon
#
petermolnar
e on their site, that is missing from most silos, showing it as a case that this is only possible with your own site. Am I making any sense?
#
aaronpk
i'm definitely in favor of more content on the wiki, but it's a bit odd to say "excessive documentation of silo features" because the wiki is a wiki, there's tons of pages about all sorts of things
#
[chrisaldrich]
Perhaps a hot take, but I wouldn't be anti-silo if they'd interoperate.
#
aaronpk
comparing two arbitrary pages isn't really useful
#
aaronpk
there are many pages that could use more documentation and examples
#
aaronpk
[chrisaldrich]: then they wouldn't be a silo ;-)
#
[chrisaldrich]
If they interoperated, then people would be presented with a better set of choices and competition for their eyeballs would result in a better system overall.
#
[chrisaldrich]
Aaron saw right through my ruse... 🙂
ethanyoo joined the channel
#
[chrisaldrich]
It may take a while, but I think that focusing on functionality and ease-of-use will eventually bring more and more people into a healthier ecosystem. By providing a better experience and more flexibility, we'll get to a tipping point where IndieWeb solutions are more mainstream and become the default. It may not completely kill the silos, but it will dramatically marginalize them. Aral and the all-or-nothing crowd never have a chance to get
#
[chrisaldrich]
to a tipping point because without interoperability they're too limited in service and flexibility to gain more than a minority of adherents.
#
petermolnar
if we embrace plurality, doesn't that mean that we also need to accept that people with certain affinity will just stay with silos?
#
jeremycherfas
Why shouldn't they?
#
[chrisaldrich]
They'll have the choice to do so. I suspect many will stay there just out of sheer inertia.
#
[Murray]
FYI that's what I meant by it being a "trap"; if you're sole focus and purpose is to drive the silos out, you'll never win, because there will always be people that prefer them. Agree with chrisaldrich, provide the tools and at least the _option_ of doing it yourself and hopefully people will migrate 🙂
#
alex11
it's just annoying when silos *start* being silo-y
#
alex11
if things were locked down from the start, it's one set of expectations
#
alex11
but when they change behavior everyone is forced to visit the silos more often
#
aaronpk
i don't think anyone here has said the goal is to get rid of silos, that's kind of the whole "bridge all the things" idea
#
[chrisaldrich]
One day the potential of webmentions to be a vector for spam will diminish dramatically and a large platform like WordPress will put them into core. That is going to be a really sad day for the silos whether they notice it or not.
#
[chrisaldrich]
I've always looked at "bridge all the things" as the Trojan horse to get us across the bridge of silo dominance.
#
petermolnar
aaronpk: maybe, again, wrong wording; should have been "just stay only with silos". I know abolish silos is not part of our goals, but it kind of is to make people use silos as well as their site, no?
#
alex11
what's interesting is jack dorsey himself bringing up that twitter interoperability project or whatever it's called
#
alex11
whether zuckerberg is ever interested in the same... who knows
#
aaronpk
Something that's been bothering me about this whole conversation is the idea that the IndieWeb community needs to have a singular goal or act as a singular entity at all. That's just not the case
#
aaronpk
we're a loosely knit community of people who share many but not all similar goals
#
[chrisaldrich]
aaronpk is right about this
#
jeremycherfas
People do sometimes seem to lay down the law about what is and is not acceptable though.
#
aaronpk
we do have a code of conduct if that's what you mean
#
aaronpk
there is also a sense of scope, so some things are out of scope or off topic, but that's not the same as a goal
#
[Murray]
hmm, I'm not sure I agree that you can have a scope without a goal, but maybe that's just overly semantic
#
jacky
you most def can
#
[Murray]
fair enough 😄
#
[Murray]
but how do you decide the boundary without a common reference?
#
[chrisaldrich]
Given the resources Twitter has, I suspect Jack's interoperability play is mostly lip service for an antiregulation play that he sees lingering on the horizon. He's also sitting on a well-valued company that is generally stagnant, which is never good in the eyes of stockholders. He's also faced with the pressure of chasing Facebook.
workfrosty and [tantek] joined the channel
#
[tantek]
agree with aaronpk's concerns about assumptions or "the idea that the IndieWeb community needs to have a singular goal or act as a singular entity at all. That's just not the case"
#
[tantek]
very few things here are "singular", Code of Conduct and /principles being two of them which are the results of LOTS of community discussions and finding consensus over the years, especially by frankly, primarily the "doers" (rather than "talkers), the folks that have shown up and positively contributed, both virtually, and to IWCs in person
#
[tantek]
the building blocks are a combination of emergent and means to implement and live the /principles
#
[tantek]
the rest is all organically driven by what people themselves want for themselves and their own sites etc.
#
[tantek]
if you care about themes, great, implement themes on your own site, and it would be nice if you could document your work accordingly on /theme etc. those are both directly from /principles 3 & 5
#
[tantek]
petermolnar, it is pointless to complain about /theme vs /story. if you care about themes, great! show how great they can be using your own site! if you care about the documentation of it, great! contribute to /theme.
#
[tantek]
No one is stopping you from either, and it is not really reasonable to demand that others do that work for you (or stop doing other contributions!) in an all volunteer community
KartikPrabhu and [KevinMarks] joined the channel
#
[Raphael_Luckom]
I think that as a tangential conversation, it's worth thinking about how to best enable a plurality. One of the things that I see as important in that respect is to work on lowering barriers to comprehension. Because I can't know what's best for anyone besides me, but they also can't articulate what they would find best unless they have some familiarity with what's an option vs what's a fact of (computing) life.
#
[tantek]
"work on lowering barriers to comprehension" <-- yes, but as a secondary priority to actually doing the work on your own website
#
[tantek]
or maybe as a side-effect of working on your own website
#
[tantek]
otherwise it turns into academic handwaving by folks without actual experience making things work, which is even worse
#
[tantek]
will take some of that to #indieweb-meta
#
[Raphael_Luckom]
is it the case that people who can't or don't want to build also deserve a say?
#
[tantek]
sure, folks that have a micro.blog with their own domain and are actively using it absolutely are "doing"
#
[tantek]
but folks that don't care about their own indieweb presence? then why are you here? (besides concern trolling 🙄)
#
[Raphael_Luckom]
that makes sense
#
[chrisaldrich]
[Raphael_Luckom] They deserve a say, but without the expertise to build something for themselves, they're stuck waiting for businesses/services that can help them do what they want. https://indieweb.org/Quick_Start provides a place for them to start. Competition for services will eventually give them lots more choice in the long run.
#
[chrisaldrich]
That page also doesn't include some lower-level services like WordPress.com or Tumblr that allow you to bring your own URL to them.
#
[Raphael_Luckom]
I'd like to offer a clarification, because I suspect that the distinction I'm making is less controversial than it sounds. When I say "do people who can't build deserve a say" I'm talking about people's requests _for themselves_. Like for instance, if someone came here and said "hey I have a cognitive disability and there's this specific indiieweb thing that isn't accessible" I have _no doubt_ that people here would take that seriously.
#
[Raphael_Luckom]
That's what I mean by helping people understand the options--doing things that enable people who want to participate to participate (even if those people aren't building themselves. These are the requests that I describe as requests _for themselves_. There's another type of request that I think is what [tantek] was referring to that I would describe as an "I think you should" request. Like "I think you should do X to stick it to silos
#
[Raphael_Luckom]
because f silos". Those requests are ignorable.
#
[tantek]
I think you'll find a lot of sympathy and support here for requests for better accessibility and internationalization
#
[tantek]
And frankly gratitude to folks for pointing things out
a_chou and KempfCreative joined the channel
#
[KevinMarks]
part of the point of focus on user experience in silos is that they have often iterated those experiences with a large number of users, and there is a degree of convergence between silos for similar reasons. Does that mean we should replicate them? Not necessarily. They have different goals and site metrics than us. We aren't generally trying to pump engagement to sell ads.
#
[tantek]
right, it's helpful to document prior work. it doesn't mean "approval" of that prior work
#
aaronpk
maybe that's the confusion
#
aaronpk
people seeing documentation on the wiki and assuming that it means "approval" or that people are attempting to replicate it
#
[tantek]
some people may be attempting to replicate it, and that's ok!
#
petermolnar
isn't replicating it on purpose means implicit approval?
#
[tantek]
no it means /plurality is one of our principles
#
[tantek]
unless you mean by the individual implementing it on their site, in which was yes, it's a strong statement they agree with / want the feature / UX
#
[tantek]
in which *case* yes
#
[Raphael_Luckom]
I also think that plurality is just straigh up hard to grasp. "Do you support that person?" "Yeah!" "Do you think that the thing they're making is good?" "No!" "Don't those answers conflict with each other?" "No!"
#
aaronpk
also replicating doesn't mean exact copy. i can replicate a feature from a silo and make slight changes so that it works the way i want
#
[tantek]
[Raphael_Luckom] yes, plurality is a challenging principle to understand for a lot of default cultures. similar to diversity frankly. though now we're firmly in #indieweb-meta discussion
#
petermolnar
[tantek]: you keep reffering to /plurality, but the wiki, as it is, contains a lot of indieweb examples, and an astonishingly small amount of criticism, so it leans towards a point where many silo features look approved, or at least in my read.
#
aaronpk
lack of criticism is not the same as approval
#
[tantek]
nah, documenting something != approval. just look at Wikipedia
#
[tantek]
pretty sure nearly every popular silo page has a fairly lengthy Criticism section
#
[tantek]
if not, feel free to add more!
#
petermolnar
had we written this down anywhere, that our wiki is strictly impartial, and only exists for documentation? While for those familar with the origin of a wiki this might be obvious, for the many, I'm fairly sure, that in case of a community wiki, it is not.
#
[tantek]
no, that's also wrong. it's not "strictly impartial", that would mean having no CoC or principles. again this is #indieweb-meta
#
petermolnar
no, I'm not going to -meta. It'll cut the discussion in half, as always.
#
[tantek]
if you're talking about what should or should not go on the wiki, that's purely #indieweb-meta
shoesNsocks left the channel
#
[tantek]
it has nothing to do with what's going on your personal website 🙂
#
[chrisaldrich]
A good example of some of the above: I've had the experience of experimenting with things on my own website (having seen them on the wiki or in conversations) and ultimately realizing I either didn't like them or they weren't as useful as I'd hoped, so I was able to remove them.
#
[chrisaldrich]
hopes that I went back and documented those reasons (on my own site or the wiki)....
#
[tantek]
and even that experimenting and removal is worth documenting!
#
petermolnar
I tried to make a conversation about "all of it": the wiki, the community, the "why am I complicating my site with this?", etc. It's not as simple, as cutting it into pieces; if so, it falls apart. It was triggered by criticism, coming from multiple angles, with various problems, including http://dissertation.jackjamieson.net/#x1-710005.1.1 - a table showing that a mere 4.42% of our chat users stay active after a year. Ultimately I'm t
#
petermolnar
rying to raise the question: is what we're doing, how we're doing it, aligned with that we want to be doing or achieving? Is there even such a thing? At the moment, it seems like the answer is simply /plurality, and thus, there is no common goal, just temporary common interest.
#
[KevinMarks]
the longer answer is going to be how any kind of group keeps going, which is people making the effort to do so, which reminds me a bit of https://www.gwern.net/docs/technology/2005-shirky-agroupisitsownworstenemy.pdf
#
petermolnar
I'm going to read this, [KevinMarks], thank you!
[amy] joined the channel
#
[tantek]
petermolnar, that sounds more meta than about a specific personal site so that's why I think it's still more appropriate for #indieweb-meta
jolvera joined the channel
#
schmudde
[chrisaldrich]: I dig your adverts (https://boffosocko.com/2020/12/01/indieweb-advertising-cards/). Have you thought about a clever way of ummm... pinning them up around the web?
#
Loqi
[Chris Aldrich] IndieWeb Inspirational Cards
[schmarty], gxt, ethanyoo and [snarfed] joined the channel
#
[snarfed]
buy ads! *ducks*
#
[schmarty]
🦆 🦆
[tw2113_Slack_] joined the channel
#
[tw2113_Slack_]
don’t be a quack snarfed
#
[snarfed]
half serious actually
bltavares joined the channel
#
[tantek]
you put them somewhere people can easily copy/paste and put them on their own site
#
[tantek]
and you design them with dimensions that drop right into existing templates / themes
#
[schmarty]
make a micropub client 😄
#
[tantek]
that has a copy/paste fallback even for non-micropub support 😄
#
[schmarty]
kapowski might be a good starting point 😂 https://glitch.com/edit/#!/garrulous-smile
ethanyoo joined the channel
#
[tantek]
-> #indieweb-dev (should have said that earlier when Marty said micropub 😉 )
rrix, [chrisaldrich] and [KevinMarks] joined the channel
#
lahacker
i feel like site interoperability in general is a self-perpetuating long-term goal and that expanding the breadth (users) and depth (specs/features) of interop is our short-term goal
#
lahacker
and i wonder if "don't pave the cowpaths" plays any role here
#
lahacker
but i'm curious, petermolnar why don't you accept homepage mentions?
#
petermolnar
Main root page is basic and personal info, meaning there isn't anything on the site that could be commented or reacted on. For chat/talk/communication, I prefer other methods.
#
[snarfed]
petermolnar the other (main?) type of home page mention is literal mentions, eg someone posts “I was talking to Peter the other day and…” where “Peter” links to your site
#
petermolnar
a notification I'll receive through webmention.io, but I'm not storing anything that pinged the homepage
#
lahacker
you could send yourself an e-mail ;)
#
[snarfed]
:thumbsup:
#
lahacker
point is, using your own site is like step one but you're still an island; using your site to communicate with another site requires the "IndieWeb" to exist
#
petermolnar
that is exactly what happens: the webmention.io calls a zaiper webhook which sends an email.
#
lahacker
so then you do accept homepage mentions you just don't display them
#
petermolnar
that depends on the definition of accept; given it's a throwaway notification, compared to parsed, saved, processed on the rest, I've defined the latter as "accept"
#
lahacker
we mention each other in chat to great effect all the time yet most often i hear of people rejecting their homepage mentions
#
lahacker
is it because this public, logged chat room is more private?
#
petermolnar
I'd like to respond with a counter question: what should I do with such a mention to my homepage?
#
lahacker
see it and respond to it?
#
lahacker
otherwise i have to come to chat and say hey petermolnar check out the post i mentioned you in: https://ange...
#
lahacker
and if you and I and we become dependent on homepage mention-based discussions then we *need* to perpetuate the IndieWeb technologies and the community around them
#
aaronpk
i treat home page mentions like twitter @-mentions, they show up in my reader and i can respond to them
#
aaronpk
it's nothing really special, they just don't get displayed publicly anywhere
#
petermolnar
there are multiple steps involved in how I handle webmentions. In webmention.io, there are no filters, so even the homepage will receive them. That means that I will indeed get a notification in form of an email. However, I see no reason to display those kind of notifications on my front page, meaning I also don't want to store them.
#
aaronpk
not sure i understand the leap from not wanting to display them to not wanting to store them
#
[chrisaldrich]
schmudde, thanks! I was hoping that pinning them up on my website and CC0'ing them for others to download and use was a good start.
ethanyoo, [mapkyca], jamietanna, gpickett00, [fluffy] and [jackjamieson] joined the channel
#
[jackjamieson]
petermolnar: I’m just chiming in about the 4.42% stat. I want to add a caveat: ~95% of people who ever post to chat do so for fewer than 12 months, but I have no idea (and it’s difficult to track precisely) how that translates to the way people use their personal website. I also don’t think it’s such a bad stat overall, seems pretty in line with the 1% rule - the more I thought about this, the less surprised I was by the small size
#
[jackjamieson]
That said, I think you’re raising an important point. For the challenge of balancing plurality with UX/growth/“lowering barriers to comprehension” is a pivotal piece of IndieWeb, and what makes it different from many similar endeavours. I agree with aaronpk that IndieWeb does not have a singular goal and that’s okay. But, that definitely can be a barrier for some.
#
[jackjamieson]
I summarize my thoughts about this toward the end of my dissertation (albeit from a different angle). If interested, see section 8.4 at http://dissertation.jackjamieson.net/#x1-1240008.4 (and particular 8.4.1).
#
[tantek]
what are homepage mentions
#
Loqi
person mention is a homepage webmention sent to a person's homepage https://indieweb.org/homepage_mentions
#
[tantek]
petermolnar ^^^, and feel free to add any questions to a Brainstorming section there
ehmry joined the channel
#
[jackjamieson]
^^ I was going to try to summarize my argument in a couple lines, but to be honest it’s first thing in the morning for me and I want to get a coffee before I can really think clearly. I might try to write up a post later, since I think this is an interesting debate
[KevinMarks] joined the channel
#
@510home
The Totoro scene by @Lady_Ada_King is what made @aframevr click with me. I abandoned game engines and focused on webVR. From there learned about net neutrality, the values of the open web, etc. I guess I got radicalized on @glitch ? https://twitter.com/glitch/status/1334615032693469198
(twitter.com/_/status/1334619582078754817)
schmudde joined the channel
#
petermolnar
aaronpk, lahacker: so far none of the usecases of a homepage mention really manifested for me, as in I haven't received any useful mentions like that. If this changes, and storing homepage mentions become reasonable, I'll change my methods. Until then, I'm refusing to store data on the notion of "this might be good some day for something."
#
[tantek]
not a bad methodological filter, though sounds more like a #indieweb-dev decision (unless there's actual tools today that give you a UI letting you choose whether to store homepage mentions or not?)
#
aaronpk
i guess maybe i'm confused what you mean by "store"
#
aaronpk
if you're receiving them and can be aware of them, that's all I mean
#
aaronpk
i don't think i store home page mentions in my website like I do comments on posts, they only appear in my reader
#
petermolnar
is my code editor a UI?
#
lahacker
well it all started with me going to petermolnar's homepage to look up contact info: email or ... webmentions! "This site also accepts webmentions, but only on the entries themselves." well.. let's see if he's posted a note about this topic re: "across the past weeks I circled back to questions around the identity of indieweb itself"
#
lahacker
and it made me realize that homepage mentions make interaction bidirectional
#
lahacker
so let me try to simplify my argument.. petermolnar i don't think you would have posted what you posted this morning, on your own website. it would have been a little self defeating as the very act of publishing it was *something* and /THAT'S/ the IndieWeb
#
lahacker
further, cultivating and encouraging rich discussions on your own site heightens dependency on the existence of the IndieWeb
#
lahacker
one-to-one can quickly become a group of three or more
#
lahacker
and, crucially, no one will ask you to take it to another room
#
lahacker
i think the fact that you wanted to keep the discussion in the main room clearly points to an audience issue which makes me wonder: have we wired this chat properly to encourage posting on your own site first?
#
lahacker
i hope you don't mind me singling you out petermolnar; you aren't doing anything wrong!
toupain, jeremycherfas, qa5_ and ethanyoo joined the channel
#
jacky
lahacker: ha, I'd actually be into that