Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
MSC4192: Comparison of proposals for ignoring invites #4192
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
MSC4192: Comparison of proposals for ignoring invites #4192
Changes from 2 commits
c738399
e1a1df7
f930446
a61dcb1
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I never really thought about expressing this as moderation policy lists but I actually love it. This is 100% in the spirit of Matrix as a protocol, where we can share our views of who to ignore and consciously choose to opt-in.
There is the question over which room should your own personal blocklists go, to which profiles as rooms would be the obvious candidate if it ever landed.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Given how complex push rules are to implement correctly, I have zero desire to reproduce this here. The complexity issue should be mentioned as a negative.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
How would you say the complexity compares to the policy list proposal above? My hunch is the policy lists could appear less complex only because they currently have fewer matching and action constructs. If the invite rules proposal would be stripped down to be on par feature-wise, would you still consider it a lot more complex to implement?
I'm not necessarily in favor of this proposal. Just trying to make sure I'm not discounting it unfairly.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@kegsay You can read the full MSC3659 spec for more details. It's just a list of rules which are evaluated in series. I've implemented the spec myself and the implementation is not that complicated.
Even if it comparatively complicated, compared to
m.ignore_users
, approving and implementing it would give Matrix the critical user safety tools it currently lacks. If we can have spaces and threads, both vastly more complicated, surely we can be able to properly block dms from harassers. If you have any individual critiques about specific rule types then I'd be open to accepting changes