[HN Gopher] POSSE: Publish on your own site, syndicate elsewhere
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       POSSE: Publish on your own site, syndicate elsewhere
        
       Author : pabs3
       Score  : 142 points
       Date   : 2021-11-05 05:13 UTC (2 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (indieweb.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (indieweb.org)
        
       | JonathanBuchh wrote:
       | I think this is a pretty pragmatic approach to decentralization
       | on the web since it's achievable now. I like it.
        
       | bryanlarsen wrote:
       | When Twitter first came out I thought it would be an RSS for the
       | masses. I thought 140 characters is useless for conversation, but
       | a reasonable length for a title and link.
       | 
       | Definitely got that prediction wrong.
        
         | rightbyte wrote:
         | Pre-algorithm Facebook was quite good for getting a snapshot of
         | what people did gossip about.
         | 
         | However Zuckerberg could not allow his lusers to rank content,
         | so they added som opaque algorithm to serve whatever they
         | wanted us to see instead.
         | 
         | I have not used Twitter to any extent, but have they done
         | something similar?
        
         | Oddskar wrote:
         | No you weren't wrong. It's still largely useless for
         | _conversation_. It 's great for bandwagoning, trolling, angry
         | mobs etc.
         | 
         | We didn't make the message less noisy to fit into 140 chars, we
         | just removed most of the substance to make it fit.
        
       | drodil wrote:
       | POSSE is also Finnish TV show with the Dudesons hosting it :D
        
         | controlledchaos wrote:
         | It's also a software product by a company named Computronix.
        
       | kixiQu wrote:
       | I will note that indieweb folks sometimes get a little dogmatic
       | about POSSE being better than PESOS (Publish Elsewhere, Syndicate
       | to your Own Site). Because POSSE necessarily entails write-
       | permissions, it's titchier to set up than PESOS-ing your public
       | content elsewhere back to your own site. I had a lot of stuff
       | PESOSed from Lemmy (https://lemmy.ml/post/47757) to my own site
       | (https://maya.land/responses/2021/01/14/recyclable-plastic-is...)
       | because I could just scrape the content out of the Lemmy RSS feed
       | and reformat. Similarly I pull over Hypothes.is annotations
       | (https://via.hypothes.is/https://theprepared.org/features-fee...)
       | to a personal wiki where I clean them up into posts for my site
       | (https://maya.land/responses/2021/07/29/geofoam-giant-
       | styrofo...). Sure, if I wanted to update in two places it'd get
       | titchy, but because I'm mainly using these other sites as front-
       | ends to get a canonical personal copy I then mess with, it works
       | pretty well. Hell, I even take Mastodon
       | (https://occult.institute/@maya) and shove it into a twtxt
       | (https://github.com/buckket/twtxt) file on my site
       | (https://maya.land/assets/twtxt.txt). Once you start thinking
       | about stuff with these approaches you can always find a
       | convenient way to duct tape things together.
        
       | jawns wrote:
       | What are some of the services that are trying to make this
       | process as automated and user-friendly as possible, ideally for
       | people who have no idea how to host or manage their own web site?
       | 
       | I'm thinking about the people who have no idea how to register a
       | domain name, find hosting, etc. let alone federate their content
       | to various social media services, so instead they use FB /
       | Twitter / etc. as a substitute.
       | 
       | What (paid, non-ad-supported) services offer POSSE but take care
       | of everything for you?
        
         | politician wrote:
         | You could probably leverage Buffer for this. They mostly target
         | scheduled social media posts.
         | 
         | buffer.com
        
           | PersonalOps wrote:
           | Yes and no. Buffer and Hootsuite are 2 players in this game,
           | both allowing to publish or schedule posts based on updates
           | to an RSS feed you configure. Most blogging engines
           | (WordPress, Jekyll, Hugo) come with RSS feed publishing by
           | default.
           | 
           | The tricky part here is the quality of the posts will be bad.
           | Each social network has its own social mores and taboos. Some
           | examples:
           | 
           | Fediverse you refer to Twitter as "birdsite". Anything
           | automated here, unless explicitly called out as a bot
           | account, tends to get ignored as low quality.
           | 
           | Facebook does posts in long-form.
           | 
           | Twitter can thread it to be long-form, but each tweet needs
           | to stand on its own with contributing to the overall
           | narrative. Basic pagination type of splitting sticks out.
           | 
           | LinkedIn... I don't know anyone who posts there that isn't
           | trying to artificially puff themselves up in corporate
           | culture, promote their product/service, or some combination.
           | I'm truly unsure what a "quality" post on there looks like,
           | so go wild.
           | 
           | Basically, posting "<post-title> (<link>)" is probably the
           | most ubiquitous, low effort ways of cross-posting your
           | content but... it's pretty universally understood that it's
           | low quality content and not likely to accomplish the
           | originally intended syndication.
        
         | kixiQu wrote:
         | I think Micro.blog does some of this for Twitter? Or if not, it
         | plugs into Bridgy? https://micro.blog/ https://brid.gy/
        
         | pmlnr wrote:
         | That wiki behind the link has quite a bit of depth to it,
         | including answers to your question, so it's worth searching it.
         | 
         | Anyway:
         | 
         | - for a full service see, for example, https://withknown.com/
         | 
         | - for WordPress plugins:
         | https://indieweb.org/WordPress/Plugins#POSSE_Plugins
         | 
         | - one can also use services like IFTTT, Zapier, Integromat, etc
         | to do this, see https://indieweb.org/2020/West/webmentions-and-
         | automation for more
         | 
         | - there's https://brid.gy/about#publishing
         | 
         | ... aand a lot more.
        
           | kixiQu wrote:
           | Seconding this: the protocol-ish things to learn about would
           | be microformats2 and webmentions, and then Bridgy can POSSE
           | from anything that supports those (someone probably has a
           | premade WP install by now, lots of folks use static sites but
           | they take more tweaking)
        
         | eropple wrote:
         | The first thing that comes to mind to me is WPEngine or other
         | high-quality hosted Wordpress solution. You can install a
         | plugin (from the web console, it's very easy) to post to social
         | media, and there's another plugin to cross-post to Medium if
         | that's your bag.
         | 
         | EDIT: I was wrong about Medium. They sunset that a couple years
         | ago. You can use their import tool explicitly, or manually copy
         | your post in and set a canonical link to your blog. That
         | _sucks_.
        
       | randomperson_24 wrote:
       | I think the problem is that social media platforms, especially
       | Twitter downranks your post if it has a link.
       | 
       | Therefore, recently people have been writing threads with a link
       | to post at end of thread. The reason simply is that platforms
       | want people to remain on the platform for longer periods of time.
       | 
       | Instagram doesn't even allow you to have a link in your post.
       | Just in the profile.
        
         | icelancer wrote:
         | >> I think the problem is that social media platforms,
         | especially Twitter downranks your post if it has a link.
         | 
         | Huh - is this true? It anecdotally felt very true to me when
         | posting content - is there data/reports on this somewhere to
         | view?
        
           | chipotle_coyote wrote:
           | The problem is that it's very hard to distinguish between
           | "posts with links get less engagement because Twitter is
           | subtly suppressing them" and "posts with links get less
           | engagement because people are just less likely to click
           | 'like' and 'retweet' on them."
        
         | forgotmypw17 wrote:
         | You're right, and I think it's a testament to how effective
         | POSSE is. The dinosaur platforms are scared of it, which is why
         | they are discouraging links.
         | 
         | You described the solution yourself. You can still do POSSE,
         | but instead of a link you can write something like, "link to
         | original post is in the comments" or "originally published on
         | my website, you know how to find it".
         | 
         | It may be tricky or even impossible to automate, but isn't that
         | how you know it's good, according to PG? :)
        
           | FalconSensei wrote:
           | > originally published on my website, you know how to find it
           | 
           | I don't think that works. People are already lazy to click a
           | link, imagine having to go to the blog and then search for
           | the actual post
        
             | MaxBarraclough wrote:
             | To put a different spin on that point: it would be perverse
             | to deliberately throw out the cornerstones of the web: URLs
             | and hyperlinks.
             | 
             | (Not that I have a better answer to Twitter's isolationist
             | shenanigans, mind.)
        
             | forgotmypw17 wrote:
             | The scenario I imagine is that they already read the post
             | on the other platform, so the reason they're going to the
             | website is to find the latest and greatest, which appears
             | on the other platforms with a delay, creating an incentive
             | to go to the source.
             | 
             | Of course, this also requires content engaging enough to
             | create that reaction...
        
           | jdgoesmarching wrote:
           | You are far more optimistic about this than me. The web has
           | centralized rapidly and no platform is incentivized to allow
           | links out.
           | 
           | Without legislation, these platforms can build walls easier
           | than we can build ladders. Your average user isn't all that
           | interested in following links in the first place, so it's an
           | uphill battle from every angle.
        
             | forgotmypw17 wrote:
             | You're right, I do believe in optimism.
             | 
             | Though it's hard for me to imagine legislation helping the
             | situation, since regulations are usually written for/by the
             | big incumbents to dig a deeper moat around themselves.
        
           | lrem wrote:
           | So, walled gardens are now the dinosaurs and reinvention of
           | good old planet is the new thing they're afraid of :)
        
         | kingcharles wrote:
         | Same problem with TikTok. You have to tell your viewers to
         | check your profile and then you have a single link to your home
         | page, and they will have to go there and dig around for
         | whatever information you want them to see. Not ideal, but I
         | still want to drive everyone to a domain I own rather than have
         | them live on a platform I don't.
         | 
         | Pinterest banned my account the other day by mistake and it
         | took me two weeks of pestering the shit out of them for them to
         | admit it and reinstate it.
        
           | patmorgan23 wrote:
           | That's why services like LinkTree got really popular. You
           | could do the same with your own website pretty easily.
        
         | echelon wrote:
         | That _screams_ antitrust.
         | 
         | We need to tell our legislators to go after companies that
         | disallow or downrank external links.
        
           | FalconSensei wrote:
           | Not sure about that. Because they tell you the timeline is
           | ordered by what they think you could like - unless you change
           | it back to 'home' - so they can just show data that tells
           | legislators that people don't click on links, and that they
           | interact more with threads instead.
        
       | mooreds wrote:
       | A bit old (mentions tumblr) but always a good idea to own your
       | content.
       | 
       | It's the perennial tradeoff: do you want reach or ownership. Of
       | course, you want both, but getting reach from your own site takes
       | effort, time or money (or all three). Platforms like Twitter,
       | etc, allow you to leverage their reach, but then take ownership
       | of the content (at least the form of content you put on their
       | site, which may include excerpts or links or user click data).
        
         | KarlKemp wrote:
         | They don't "take ownership". For one thing, it isn't entirely
         | clear what the term is supposed to entail. It probably refers
         | to that perennial complaint about TOS at such sites, that tend
         | to go a bit overboard and are then misunderstood/represented as
         | some nefarious ploy to make sweet bank with people's memes
         | when, in what some describe as 'reality', they do need some
         | sort of license to show the photo you uploaded.
         | 
         | I recently deleted some things on medium that I wrote years ago
         | and had zero trouble doing it. Try that in some arrangement
         | where you really grant 'ownership'. "Hello Microsoft, would you
         | please remove the background animation from the BSOD".
         | 
         | What is really more of a technical detail, the domain name of
         | the site serving some content, seems to take on outsized
         | importance for some people. As far as I can tell, this are not
         | actual creators of content of the sort where it would start
         | being lucrative to swindle them out of ownership.
         | 
         | Case in point: AMP. If Google had, from the beginning, made it
         | possible for AMP content to be served from the publisher's
         | (sub)domain, opposition on HN would have likely been half as
         | fierce, or less. As we now know with some certainty, AMP really
         | was a ploy to screw over the competition. It's quite excellent
         | that it failed, but it did so mostly due to people falsely
         | believing _they_ are getting screwed over due to this
         | implementation detail, when really it was competing ad networks
         | who were getting the wrong end of the stick, but wouldn't have
         | been in any position to stop it except anti-trust litigation.
        
           | epeus wrote:
           | It's not so much that they take ownership, more that they
           | choose who can see it, and can remove it arbitrarily from the
           | web.
        
         | mattl wrote:
         | People still use tumblr.
        
           | throwaway984393 wrote:
           | People still use Myspace...
        
             | unicornporn wrote:
             | Nah, https://spacehey.com/
        
             | mattl wrote:
             | People still use and pay for Flickr
        
               | tata71 wrote:
               | What's wrong with any of this?
               | 
               | Like they can't add IPFS or dapp code to any of these?
        
               | mattl wrote:
               | They could, but none of this is about that.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-11-07 23:00 UTC)