Add user preference to show posts from users limited server-wide

[ClearlyClaire]

Fixes #26524

Potentially addresses #19355 as well

(This has not been discussed internally, and it has not been tested; more specific tests would also need to be written)

This PR introduces a setting to decide which limited users to show the posts of:

• “Hide posts from limited users” (only show from people you follow): this is the current behavior, kept to not cause a breaking change
• “Show posts from limited users who follow you”: this is probably the one that makes the most sense, as once you've accepted someone into your followers (which is a required step for limited users), it makes sense to see their replies/notifications even if you do not interact with them
• “Show posts from limited users”: useful if you feel your server's moderators are too heavy-handed with limits

[joenepraat]

I think it's good to give users a choice. Not all users on a server are the same and have different expectations about Mastodon or social media in general.

Still I think it's a good idea to add some kind of warning before users decide to enable posts by limited users. Because there is (mostly) a good reason moderators limited those users.

[joenepraat]

Another thing. When a local user who enabled showing posts from limited users report a limited user, it would be a good idea to trigger a warning like "This user is already limited by a server moderator, please reconsider reporting this user".

[timbray]

Could "limited users" be a link to an explanation of what that means?

[ThisIsMissEm]

This sounds good to me from a moderation / trust & safety side, but I suspect we may need an option for a server admin to change this for an account (e.g., the user has show all turned on but keeps reporting posts, ignoring the (suggested) warning, so the admin can downgrade from show everything to one of the more restrictive settings

[ClearlyClaire]

Could "limited users" be a link to an explanation of what that means?

The existing documentation is meant for moderators, and I believe the paragraph above the radio buttons describe it accurately for the user perspective, but I suppose we could still have a dedicated documentation section for this.

This sounds good to me from a moderation / trust & safety side, but I suspect we may need an option for a server admin to change this for an account (e.g., the user has show all turned on but keeps reporting posts, ignoring the (suggested) warning, so the admin can downgrade from show everything to one of the more restrictive settings

I am not sure we want to encourage moderators to change a user's settings on their behalf; however it makes sense for users to know they are reporting someone who has already been silenced, and for moderators to know the user has opted into seeing limited users.

[ThisIsMissEm]

This sounds good to me from a moderation / trust & safety side, but I suspect we may need an option for a server admin to change this for an account (e.g., the user has show all turned on but keeps reporting posts, ignoring the (suggested) warning, so the admin can downgrade from show everything to one of the more restrictive settings

I am not sure we want to encourage moderators to change a user's settings on their behalf; however it makes sense for users to know they are reporting someone who has already been silenced, and for moderators to know the user has opted into seeing limited users.

Mmm, yeah, I'm just wanting to try to resolve that "the user keeps reporting silenced accounts, because they have "show silenced" enabled, so giving the admin the ability to go "nah, we're gunna disable that for you" might be necessary.

[github-actions]

This pull request has merge conflicts that must be resolved before it can be merged.

[github-actions]

This pull request has resolved merge conflicts and is ready for review.

[github-actions]

This pull request has merge conflicts that must be resolved before it can be merged.

[ThisIsMissEm]

@ClearlyClaire I think you may want to split the second option in the screenshot above in to two options:

• Ignore limited users unless you follow them
• Ignore limited users unless you follow them or they follow you

[ClearlyClaire]

Ignore limited users unless you follow them

This is the current behavior, and the first option.

[cassidyjames]

👋 UX designer here. Here’s an unsolicited UX copywriting stab. My goals:

• More concise
• More clear about what moderators
• Swap to positive (show) instead of double negative (ignore unless)

Open to feedback or critique, but this feels more clear to me. Feel free to use, modify, or ignore it.

Limited Accounts

Limited Accounts have had their reach and visibility limited by example.com moderators. Their posts do not show in trends and public feeds, but can be shown and interacted with if you explicitly allow it here.

Show posts, replies, and interactions from:

• Limited accounts you follow
  Posts, replies, and notifications will only be displayed if you explicitly follow the limited account

• Limited accounts you follow or approved
  Posts, replies, and notifications will be displayed if you follow the limited account or accept their follow request

• Any limited accounts
  Posts, replies, and notifications will be shown from any limited accounts. Note this may make you more susceptible to seeing unsolicited replies or abusive behavior from limited accounts.

[github-actions]

This pull request has resolved merge conflicts and is ready for review.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: 28 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (da72908) 84.79% compared to head (8bf0984) 84.71%.
Report is 197 commits behind head on main.

Files	Patch %	Lines
app/lib/feed_manager.rb	35.71%	7 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
app/services/notify_service.rb	41.66%	7 Missing ⚠️
app/lib/status_filter.rb	50.00%	6 Missing ⚠️
app/services/follow_service.rb	40.00%	5 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #26904      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   84.79%   84.71%   -0.08%     
==========================================
  Files        1039     1039              
  Lines       28253    28294      +41     
  Branches     4557     4577      +20     
==========================================
+ Hits        23956    23970      +14     
- Misses       3139     3164      +25     
- Partials     1158     1160       +2     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[github-actions]

This pull request has merge conflicts that must be resolved before it can be merged.

[omentic]

Hello!

I desperately want something like this, and will probably try my hand at adapting this to the server I'm on. This would be very cool to have merged into glitch-soc. That said, I think there should be an additional setting to collapse instead of remove posts from limited users, in the style of filtered posts, perhaps as a checkbox along these three options.

(personally I think mutes should always collapse posts instead of remove them outright... this generally leads to confusion for new and old users alike, especially when combined with federation never being perfect. but this is also good.)