Conversation
FSG-Cat
changed the title
m.role.moderator /.well-known/matrix/support role.m.role.moderator /.well-known/matrix/support role.
turt2live
added
proposal
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Implementation requirements:
- Server publishing this information, preferably several servers.
- Client or consumer which uses and requires this information.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Implemented in msc1929 go client that is used by MRS (ref)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ruma "unstable" implementation for clients and servers to use: ruma/ruma#1768
Conduwuit implements an admin command to fetch /.well-known/matrix/support, and supports serving the file directly with the moderator role (or any other role).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Servers publishing this role:
Note: this is an incomplete list and there are probably more servers out there.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Adding to the consumers of the data note https://muninn-hall.com/ is one community who uses this data via our bot as this data is used for validating homeserver moderation staff in addition to their administration staff.
| @@ -0,0 +1,58 @@ | |||
| # MSC4121: `m.role.moderator` `/.well-known/matrix/support` role. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Real world use: some homeservers have 100% separation between administrators (server maintainers) and moderators (those who handle reports and appeals).
This distinction is generally due to wanting to have privacy for reports/appeals, which admins have no involvement in at all, and administrators shouldn't even know about moderation concerns.
Another example: etke.cc (matrixrooms.info developers & maintainers) would also benefit from this (administrator -> etke.cc as server admins, moderator -> instance staff).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sounds as excellent case, and I'd propose to include it in the Proposal section of the MSC
administrator -> etke.cc as server admins
There is a misunderstanding - etke.cc handles only the system part of the server (OS-level, components deployments and configuration, etc.), we don't even have matrix user-level access to the customers' servers.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, I know that, that's why I said server admins - you handle deployment and maintenance.
github-project-automation
Bot
moved this to Tracking for review
in Spec Core Team Workflow
turt2live
moved this from Tracking for review
to Ready for general review
in Spec Core Team Workflow
| not hard to imagine that if your a managed hosting provider for a matrix homeserver that your the listed | ||
| contact for matters like your server is outdated or my server is having federation issues with your server. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not quite sure that even in this situation the managed hosting provider is the right person for a user to reach directly out to. I would expect a server administrator to be part of its primary operators, not the team hosting it (who likely doesn't want to deal with end users directly).
| reports that found them self's in the wrong pile. | ||
|
|
||
| If a server only has `m.role.admin` defined then the administrator is either a catch-all or forwards requests | ||
| internally. But if `m.role.admin` and `m.role.moderator` are defined then moderation matters are to be directed |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
"are to be" - is this a SHOULD, MAY or a MUST?
turt2live
left a comment
turt2live
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This appears to be in the SCT review queue, though I think it'll be best to get a T&S opinion on this first. The role overlaps with their Reporting v2 project, but might have use cases outside of it. A notion of approval from T&S I think would be more helpful than an SCT opinion at this stage.
Other SCT members may have different opinions.
6 participants
Rendered
This MSC gives homeservers the ability to split administration and moderation in their support records.
Signed-off-by: Catalan Lover catalanlover@protonmail.com