benpate

@benpate@activitypub.space · Joined ⁨Sep⁩ ⁨2025⁩

Developer of Emissary
Host of Bandwagon.fm

Replying to @⁨silverpill@mitra.social⁩

@silverpill@mitra.social

Yes, an Endorsement is very similar to Relationship and I wrestled with this a bunch. But I think we're modeling a one-way relationship, not two way. I think it's something like this:

Relationship: Alice <- work together -> Bob
Endorsement: Alice -> endorses work product -> Bob

And in more practical (and less theoretical) terms, this new object allows us to assume tighter controls around how an Endorsement was made. As under-specified as it is, I could post a valid Relationship between myself and Robert Plant (I did meet him once) and there's no way to verify it. Using a new object, like Endorsement, we can rely on the workflow around this object a little more, and can verify that Robert Plant actually acknowledged my endorsement (but I'm certain he wouldn't remember me, the kid in the bookstore)

So, we should reuse as much of the existing vocabulary as we can (context, content, etc) but I think there's a good reason for a new top-level object.

Replying to @⁨benpate@activitypub.space⁩

I've updated the document to use "Endorsement" as an object (instead of "Endorse" as an activity). This changes the name to "FEP-d471: Endorsements". I've also tried to incorporate a number of the ideas and suggestions here, including a context URI to identify specific KINDS of endorsements, as well as explanations for many common questions.

If you're following this, now is a great time to revisit the FEP. This whole thing will be migrated to Codeberg soon (a PR is already in the works) and this will be the primary place to discuss updates :slightly_smiling_face:

Replying to @⁨silverpill@mitra.social⁩

Hey @silverpill@mitra.social !

I tried to use the existing vocabulary as much as possible. It seems like this fits the existing grammar, does it not?

{
  type:"Offer"
  object: {
    type:"Endorse"
  }
}

Also, Gilles makes a strong point to just use the word "Trust" -- it's simpler and better known around the world. What do you think of that, instead?

Summary of my input: I think "trust" is a better word than "endorse" I think there is no way to get around allowing different "flavors of trust" I am not sure the implementation proposed allows rem...GitHubWording, flavors of trust, and changing your mind · Issue #4 · EmissarySocial/fep-endorsementsSummary of my input: I think "trust" is a better word than "endorse" I think there is no way to get around allowing different "flavors of trust" I am not sure the implementation proposed allows rem...by gillesdutilh

FEP-3447: Endorsements

This is a topic for community work on FEP-3447: Endorsements. The early-early-pre-draft is currently on my own GitHub, but should be moving to the official Codeberg repository soon.

I recently started a discussion on Mastodon that is ready to move to a bigger venue. So here we are 🤓

Planning and discussion for a FEP to add "Endorsements" into the Fediverse - EmissarySocial/fep-endorsementsGitHubGitHub - EmissarySocial/fep-endorsements: Planning and discussion for a FEP to add "Endorsements" into the FediversePlanning and discussion for a FEP to add "Endorsements" into the Fediverse - EmissarySocial/fep-endorsements