You want this from Mastodon in particular, or from a fediverse app you can use to talk to Mastodon services?

> Post to Mutuals only

I believe a number of fediverse apps offer this, including Friendica.

> Restrict replies to eg “No one” or “Mutuals only”

Reply-control is an oft-requested feature. GoToSocial has it, but apparently it's coming to Mastodon eventually;

https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/t/pre-fep-quote-posts-quote-policies-and-quote-controls/5031

#fediverse#ReplyControl

After reviewing FEP-5624: Per-object reply control policies and GoToSocial's interaction policy spec, I find myself leaning toward the latter for long-term considerations, though both have merit.

FEP-5624 is admirably focused and simpler to implement, which I appreciate. However, #GoToSocial's approach seems to offer some architectural advantages:

1. The three-tier permission model (allow/require approval/deny) feels more flexible than binary allow/deny
2. Separating approval objects from interactions appears more secure against forgery
3. The explicit handling of edge cases (mentioned users, post authors) provides clearer semantics
4. The extensible framework allows for handling diverse interaction types, not just replies

I wonder if creating an #FEP that extracts GoToSocial's interaction policy design into a standalone standard might be worthwhile. It could potentially serve as a more comprehensive foundation for access control in #ActivityPub.

This is merely my initial impression though. I'd be curious to hear other developers' perspectives on these approaches.

#FEP5624 #fedidev #fediverse #replycontrol #interactionpolicy

After reviewing FEP-5624: Per-object reply control policies and GoToSocial's interaction policy spec, I find myself leaning toward the latter for long-term considerations, though both have merit.

FEP-5624 is admirably focused and simpler to implement, which I appreciate. However, #GoToSocial's approach seems to offer some architectural advantages:

1. The three-tier permission model (allow/require approval/deny) feels more flexible than binary allow/deny
2. Separating approval objects from interactions appears more secure against forgery
3. The explicit handling of edge cases (mentioned users, post authors) provides clearer semantics
4. The extensible framework allows for handling diverse interaction types, not just replies

I wonder if creating an #FEP that extracts GoToSocial's interaction policy design into a standalone standard might be worthwhile. It could potentially serve as a more comprehensive foundation for access control in #ActivityPub.

This is merely my initial impression though. I'd be curious to hear other developers' perspectives on these approaches.

#FEP5624 #fedidev #fediverse #replycontrol #interactionpolicy