| 22 May 2025 |
 f0x | In reply to @gnu_ponut:matrix.org
@f0x:pixie.town https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-spec-proposals/pull/4124 right, that's less about homeserver bans though, and rather a mechanism to allow for pre-screening? | 07:31:14 |
 Gnuxie 💜🐝 | In reply to @f0x:pixie.town
right, that's less about homeserver bans though, and rather a mechanism to allow for pre-screening? it's both | 07:31:36 |
| f0x |
We will embed m.server.knock_rule in m.room.create if it someone raises
small error 'it someone'
| 07:31:37 |
| Gnuxie 💜🐝 | oki | 07:32:19 |
| f0x | In reply to @gnu_ponut:matrix.org
it's both ah yeah, by making it explicit which servers are allowed to interact with the room | 07:34:24 |
 Zhaofeng Li |
this approach doesn't work well in a shared chatroom, especially when it needs server cooperation to arrive at a shared room state
It's ugly theoretically (homeservers may never converge to the same state), but in practice it may not be that bad?
| 07:39:02 |
| Zhaofeng Li | right now servers are already missing events naturally and having different views of the room state | 07:39:25 |
|  embr joined the room. | 07:40:26 |
 emily | that results in really bad things though | 07:40:39 |
