AP => Bluesky: content warnings

[wont-work]

As an example example: this AP note gets bridged over as this bsky post. losing all the context and making a post that, while potentially funny out of context (depending on the CW used) the first few times, could end up annoying towards people from bsky.

While there really isn't a great way to solve this problem without bsky getting a similar feature, simply prepending "CW: " or something of that sort, potentially with a link back to the original post (??? unsure on this part) should at least avoid most of the confusion this could result in.

[snarfed]

Thanks for filing! Ah, content warnings, takes me all the way back to #47. And agreed, not good, we can definitely do better. Thanks for the ideas.

[qazmlp]

This goes in the direction of bikeshedding a little, but I'd like to see something like

CN: summary

<web link to original post>

with "CN" (content notice) instead "CW" because in practice people do use that function very broadly and afaik not everything calls it a content warning.

I'd prefer the in-body link over a link preview attachment here because the latter can be obtrusively large in the GUI (which runs counter to CN/CW-use to collapse posts intentionally) and would most likely just duplicate some information already present otherwise, like name, handle, avatar and summary.

[AtiusAmy]

Is there an update on this

[snarfed]

Sorry, no, not a high priority right now. Should be straightforward though, PRs are welcome! The new code would go in granary.as2.to_as1, should be pretty self contained.

(Note that we'd want to do this only when both as:sensitive and summary are present, since it was arguably an overreach on Mastodon's end to use summary for this, even if now it's pretty entrenched.)

[snarfed]

Thinking about this again. Out of curiosity, how much would you all dislike it if BF included the content notice/warning and the actual content in the bridged Bluesky post?

I get that this isn't the spirit of content notices, and that content notices are an important part of fediverse culture for at least some people there, but they're obviously not part of the Bluesky culture. I wonder if it would be overall better UX for bridged posts to include both, instead of making Bluesky users constantly open external links in order to read a significant minority of bridged posts.

[qazmlp]

To and from me that'd be fine, ideally with CN: prefixed.
Would break posts where that's used to hide a joke punchline, but those aren't really that common.

Be mindful of media attachments though, since AP lacks a real separate adult content system. (I guess Bsky could just label on their end if someone overdoes it tho.)

[AtiusAmy]

Thinking about this again. Out of curiosity, how much would you all dislike it if BF included the content notice/warning and the actual content in the bridged Bluesky post?

I get that this isn't the spirit of content notices, and that content notices are an important part of fediverse culture for at least some people there, but they're obviously not part of the Bluesky culture. I wonder if it would be overall better UX for bridged posts to include both, instead of making Bluesky users constantly open external links in order to read a significant minority of bridged posts.

I'd be fine with that, back on Twitter people were doing, so I don't think it's a problem

"CW: things

hi everyone it's things"

[snarfed]

Thanks all! I've deployed a first pass at this. Fediverse posts with content warnings/notices should now get bridged to Bluesky as:

[content notice]

post text

Let's see how that goes.