Nice!

@thomas as I'm expecting from the "leadership" of Mastodon, they do not even acknowledge the ActivityPub protocol and the complaints of people like me arguing for better spec compliance and interoperability with all servers that are not Mastodon. Sure, let's wait for everyone else to implement the shiny new things Mastodon spearheads, but no looking back to actual existing fundamentals of better interop.

Apologies for the direct mention
@imanijoy @renchap but this is beyond frustrating.

@mariusor we specifically addressed this in the post:

> As we think about our plans, we recognise that we are also part of the broader Fediverse. We make an effort to implement features in an open and interoperable manner, creating new specifications when needed. Recent examples include Quote Posts, Collections, and the Fediverse Auxiliary Service Provider specification - we’re excited to see other people build new implementations.

@renchap my reading of that is that you want us to implement the "needed new specifications" that Mastodon introduces. I have seen nothing in your github activity, or in the timeline for addressing spec compliance bugs in the way that I mean in the parent.

There's two bugs I have added to the Mastodon tracker (both related to spec compliance). The one that irks me the most is this one: https://github.com/mastodon/mastodon/issues/25588

But this bug about a specific issue exposes a much deeper problem: Mastodon didn't implement the correct logic about encoding/decoding JSON-LD payloads. I understand that might be hard to do under your existing data model, but you should still try.

@thomas thanks! What are you most interested in from the post?