Question I'd like to hear everyone's thoughts on possibly making votes public. This has been discussed in a lot of other issues, but here's a dedicated one for discussion. Positives Could help figh...
Probably better to post in the github issue rather than replying here.
Well you could do something like that but it wouldn’t affect sorting of the posts then. If you have blocked an instance and that instance has upvoted a post to 1000 votes so that it appears on the top of the All-feed, you’d see it at the top with 0 votes (or only the votes from the instances you haven’t blocked), which would be very strange.
Would the client not be able to sort the received posts after filtering? Granted things could be fairly inconsistent from one page to the next. Or maybe something like “Score: 0 (blocked: 1k)” to indicate the proportion of activity being taken out of consideration?
Definitely not confident that this is a good idea or anything btw, just spitballing
Would the client not be able to sort the received posts after filtering?
Your client only gets a page of the sorting at a time. You would only be able to sort that single page, but to do an actual sorting, you’ll need more posts than just what appears on the front page.
Right, that is what I meant by “inconsistent from one page to another”. The received posts would be in an unfiltered state on each page and so the order could be very different depending on the local blocklist, probably resulting in stuff like the top of page 2 having a higher score than the bottom of page 1 pretty frequently.
Well you could do something like that but it wouldn’t affect sorting of the posts then. If you have blocked an instance and that instance has upvoted a post to 1000 votes so that it appears on the top of the All-feed, you’d see it at the top with 0 votes (or only the votes from the instances you haven’t blocked), which would be very strange.
Would the client not be able to sort the received posts after filtering? Granted things could be fairly inconsistent from one page to the next. Or maybe something like “Score: 0 (blocked: 1k)” to indicate the proportion of activity being taken out of consideration?
Definitely not confident that this is a good idea or anything btw, just spitballing
Your client only gets a page of the sorting at a time. You would only be able to sort that single page, but to do an actual sorting, you’ll need more posts than just what appears on the front page.
Right, that is what I meant by “inconsistent from one page to another”. The received posts would be in an unfiltered state on each page and so the order could be very different depending on the local blocklist, probably resulting in stuff like the top of page 2 having a higher score than the bottom of page 1 pretty frequently.