thorfinn: <user name="seedy_girl"> and <user name="thorfinn"> (Default)
thorfinn ([personal profile] thorfinn) wrote in [site community profile] dw_suggestions2010-06-28 06:47 pm

Crosspost to Facebook Notes

Title:
Crosspost to Facebook Notes

Area:
crossposting

Summary:
The crossposter sites option should have an option to "push" notes into facebook.com.

Description:
Facebook.com currently has a Notes feature. You can point it at a public RSS feed to import notes, but that fails to re-import edited notes.

I would prefer to "push" notes into facebook via the crossposter, so that edited notes show up correctly etc.

That may or may not be technically possible to do with facebook's note posting. I suspect it would require some reverse engineering of facebook page code etc.

There are complications around posting security - facebook does actually have the concept of custom posting security, and an extra "friends of friends" level.

Also I'm pretty sure there's no way to prevent comments on a note within facebook, so this option may be problematic.

Poll #3653 Crosspost to Facebook Notes
Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 53


This suggestion:

View Answers

Should be implemented as-is.
14 (26.4%)

Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
2 (3.8%)

Shouldn't be implemented.
20 (37.7%)

(I have no opinion)
17 (32.1%)

(Other: please comment)
0 (0.0%)

damned_colonial: Convicts in Sydney, being spoken to by a guard/soldier (Default)

[personal profile] damned_colonial 2010-06-29 03:49 am (UTC)(link)
I voted "no".

1) I am not generally a fan of features which have more to do with external services/websites than DW itself. If people want those sorts of tools (for whatever external service, be it facebook or twitter or tumblr or...), I would prefer an improved API to let people build them outside of DW itself.

2) I dislike Facebook culture and the style of interaction that happens there. I fear that making it easy to crosspost to Facebook would result in lots of people coming here from Facebook and bringing Facebook social norms, which are at odds with the social norms I enjoy here on DW. (For instance, things I enjoy on DW include: lengthy, thoughtful posts and comments, a respect for pseudonymity, and the ability to segregate one's journalling from one's "real life").

3) I have serious reservations about Facebook's privacy, and am concerned that any attempt to implement this for anything other than public posts would be fraught with difficulty.
Edited 2010-06-29 03:55 (UTC)
damned_colonial: Convicts in Sydney, being spoken to by a guard/soldier (Default)

[personal profile] damned_colonial 2010-06-29 04:42 am (UTC)(link)
in re: 1), yeah, it's only LJ-codebase sites, because those ones map closely wrt settings and conceptual framework for posting, and also because there is such a high degree of crossover wrt culture and population. Not to mention coder familiarity -- adding non-LJ-like sites would mean learning and implementing a whole new framework each time, which seems like a lot of conceptual brainspace to be taking up in the DW codebase, you know? Whereas with LJ-like sites, that wasn't necessary, as the core concepts are already there.
damned_colonial: Convicts in Sydney, being spoken to by a guard/soldier (Default)

[personal profile] damned_colonial 2010-06-29 04:55 am (UTC)(link)
... except for the bit where it doesn't handle post security in a DW-like way, doesn't have comment settings, doesn't allow modifying the date...

All of which would have to be addressed *somehow*, in code and documentation and support and everywhere else, even if it's only greying out options or whatever. Which sounds like a huge pile of code-cruft to me.
denise: Image: Me, facing away from camera, on top of the Castel Sant'Angelo in Rome (Default)

[staff profile] denise 2010-06-29 04:54 am (UTC)(link)
And the protocol was the same. We do want to implement the Metaweblog API, and whatever Wordpress and TypePad/MT use, etc, but that's down the line.
matgb: Artwork of 19th century upper class anarchist, text: MatGB (Default)

[personal profile] matgb 2010-06-29 09:26 am (UTC)(link)
Was going to be my "with changes".

Allow crossposting to any site that has a functional API, that'd be grand.
foxfirefey: Fox stealing an egg. (mischief)

[personal profile] foxfirefey 2010-07-03 07:23 am (UTC)(link)
Eh, I think [personal profile] thorfinn's suggestion is here mainly for technical advice and tweakings of the current already open bug for the concept. So, it's already been approved to implement, at least.
azurelunatic: A glittery black pin badge with a blue holographic star in the middle. (Default)

[personal profile] azurelunatic 2010-06-29 04:05 am (UTC)(link)
Since I segregate my Facebook presence from my presence here under my real name, this is irrelevant to me -- thus my "no opinion" vote.
matgb: Artwork of 19th century upper class anarchist, text: MatGB (Default)

[personal profile] matgb 2010-06-29 09:28 am (UTC)(link)
I do the exact opposite, hence my with changes.

Actually, it'd also be grand to have Facebook profiles available as external user logins, that'd be very useful for some of us.
matgb: Artwork of 19th century upper class anarchist, text: MatGB (Default)

[personal profile] matgb 2010-06-30 09:14 pm (UTC)(link)
Actually, I prefer that sites allow logging in via OpenID, there are a billion identity providers out there, but very few where logging in via OpenID is useful.

Wordpress.com is my pet hate on this currently, a blog platform that supports OpenID, but doesn't allow you to log in using it to merely comment seems completely pointless to me.

However, I strongly disagree with Damned Colonial's reason above. I have no problem with my corner of Facebook, it doesn't have a culture I disagree with, and while I respect pseudonymity of others, fairly obviously, I don't follow it myself, never have (I'm involved, heavily, in politics, having an "anonymous" blog is a really bad idea).

More of my readers come to read my stuff from Twitter and Facebook than do from LJ or DW. Even more come from a UK politics aggregator (or at least did when I was posting regularly). I'd like them to be able to comment effectively. I'd also like to 'push' to those sites I make use of to aggregate my stuff.

Essentially, who are you (or anyone else) to determine what sort of culture I want in my personal journal, and why should a whole site be tarnished because some people don't like the bits they've seen?

I do plan on writing a suggestion for supporting other external IDs, which'd have to include Oauth for Twitter and probably Connect, and I think there's another one, but it needs some research.

(and please consider the slightly aggressive tone above in a "I know this is a hard thing to fight for so need to sort my arguments out" way, I don't know how to word it in a way that doesn't let my frustration show).

Honestly, I didn't sign up for a fandom blogging platform, I signed up for an LJ fork that would take the good idea and make it genuinely interoperable. Refusing to deal with other sites because there are "normal" people there and they have a "culture I don't want to see here" is, well, annoying.

The way the votes have gone almost completely against this idea, despite it being a fairly basic one, also annoys me, we need interoperability, it's one of the sites USPs, rejecting interoperability with a site that about 50% of online people have an account with is just daft.
foxfirefey: A guy looking ridiculous by doing a fashionable posing with a mouse, slinging the cord over his shoulders. (geek)

[personal profile] foxfirefey 2010-07-03 07:43 am (UTC)(link)
I noted up there and feel like I should note it again--this kind of a suggestion is already in the bug database. The votes aren't the only things that decide suggestions, they're just a general litmus, and there's not much of a reason not to do this one. It's good for business and it's entirely opt in for users and doesn't directly affect the people who don't want to use it.
sophie: A cartoon-like representation of a girl standing on a hill, with brown hair, blue eyes, a flowery top, and blue skirt. ☀ (Default)

[personal profile] sophie 2010-07-03 12:26 pm (UTC)(link)
I think your link in both this comment and your other one is wrong - it just points back to this suggestion?
foxfirefey: A picture of GIR. (gir)

[personal profile] foxfirefey 2010-07-03 08:14 pm (UTC)(link)
Yeeeeah, I got corrected in the other comment. Oh, ditziness.
sophie: A cartoon-like representation of a girl standing on a hill, with brown hair, blue eyes, a flowery top, and blue skirt. ☀ (Default)

[personal profile] sophie 2010-07-04 12:21 am (UTC)(link)
You did? I'm referring to this comment, which doesn't seem to have any replies. (Though maybe they deleted it so you could edit?)
foxfirefey: Smiley faces are born through factorized mechanical torture. (grimace)

[personal profile] foxfirefey 2010-07-04 12:25 am (UTC)(link)
Oh man. Maybe I made a comment I never submitted. Work has really put me through the ringer this week.
yvi: Kaylee half-smiling, looking very pretty (Default)

[personal profile] yvi 2010-07-03 08:31 am (UTC)(link)
Essentially, who are you (or anyone else) to determine what sort of culture I want in my personal journal, and why should a whole site be tarnished because some people don't like the bits they've seen?


*nods*
msilverstar: (corset)

[personal profile] msilverstar 2010-06-29 05:09 am (UTC)(link)
API hooks are fine, but actual push implementation seems like a lot of investment for something very few users will ever need.
aedifica: Me looking down at laptop (off screen).  Short hair. (Default)

[personal profile] aedifica 2010-06-29 02:00 pm (UTC)(link)
I'd never use it, but I have nothing against the option existing for others.
zvi: self-portrait: short, fat, black dyke in bunny slippers (Default)

[personal profile] zvi 2010-06-29 05:04 pm (UTC)(link)
If Facebook supports a crossplatform posting API (like metaweblog) then I think we should support it. If it's a facebook idiosyncratic API, then I'm not sure it's worth it.
zvi: self-portrait: short, fat, black dyke in bunny slippers (Default)

[personal profile] zvi 2010-06-30 03:11 am (UTC)(link)
I think Dreamwidth should focus on open standards and protocols, that promote generic interoperability, and allow new players to take advantage of whatever we build just by following the standard.

Just about everything with Facebook is Facebook specific. I don't think we should get into the making Facebook better business.
matgb: Artwork of 19th century upper class anarchist, text: MatGB (Default)

[personal profile] matgb 2010-06-30 09:22 pm (UTC)(link)
Except...

Facebook is one of the biggest supporters of Open Source out there at the moment, most importantly memcache, but a whole host of other things.

IIRC, they rejected OpenID as a platform for the simple reason that the UX sucks, big time, and wasn't likely to improve anytime soon, so they created Connect partially as a challenge to OpenID to get its act in gear.

OpenID has had no serious development since 2007. The UX still sucks. Facebook connect, OTOH, is dead easy, dead effective, and very useful. I use it to comment on various blogs fairly regularly.

I agree that specific site coding isn't necessarily a good thing, but Facebook is so massive, and open source projects in general, and OpenID as a specific, could learn masses from their commitment to a good user friendly experience.

Sure, there are many many flaws with it, but some of it is really really well done.
zvi: self-portrait: short, fat, black dyke in bunny slippers (Default)

[personal profile] zvi 2010-06-30 11:33 pm (UTC)(link)
I will assume, for the sake of argument, Facebook Connect is easier to login to than OpenID. (I have never had a Facebook account.) That doesn't change the fact that you can only use it to login with a Facebook account.

I don't think we should be in a "make your [non-Dreamwidth] account more useful" business, which I think building code to let you login from one particular website, or repost to one particular website, is. I'm not hostile to Facebook. I'd like us to move away from LJ-interoperable tools into more generally web interoperable tools, for instance.

But, I'm also not convinced by, "Half the internet has Facebook accounts" arguments, because there's no way to know when a quarter of the internet will start abandoning their Facebook accounts. Remember when Myspace was The Social Network? Now, it's what bands use instead of building a real website.
foxfirefey: A picture of GIR. (gir)

[personal profile] foxfirefey 2010-07-03 06:35 am (UTC)(link)
Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes. I want this done. I might not want to hook up my own journal, but I want people to be able to do this, very much. I think it would get DW in front of the eyes of a wider variety of people, and I'm really all for that.
auguris: We are behind a woman who is sitting on the edge of a bed and playing her guitar. (Dreamwidth)

[personal profile] auguris 2010-07-03 07:25 am (UTC)(link)
I think this is an excellent idea that will help ensure the continued growth of DW, especially beyond the Service For People Who Don't Like LJ Anymore. I mean, that was fun for like a month.

[personal profile] ex_bel786 2010-07-03 12:20 pm (UTC)(link)
+1
charmian: a snowy owl (Default)

[personal profile] charmian 2010-07-03 07:38 am (UTC)(link)
This suggestion has some similarities to bug 2375, originally proposed here, so people may be interested in the issues brought up there.