| 22 May 2025 |
 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 |
| emily | silent netsplits that make us replace rooms | 07:40:53 |
|  cryptix joined the room. | 07:59:37 |
 uep | In reply to @f0x:pixie.town
there is? https://element-hq.github.io/synapse/latest/admin_api/media_admin_api.html#purge-remote-media-api yes, that's a purge of all remote media, not a garbage collection of media no longer referenced because the events have been redacted. Still works (assuming you weren't hosting the spammer), but: requires action on each server, and is an overly-blunt instrument. | 08:00:50 |
