@Velux Eventually. Our keyword filters have regex support which are much better than the web ones. But we will figure out how to make them all play nicely.
Top-level
@Velux Eventually. Our keyword filters have regex support which are much better than the web ones. But we will figure out how to make them all play nicely. 1 comment
|
@ivory @Velux another user begging for this, here! At minimum I’d love an option to “use server filters” where trying to mute something just opens a web browser to the server filters page, instead of the in-app filters.
I’m glad to have learned in another sub-thread that server side “hide completely” filters are implemented in ivory while “hide with a warning” are not (yet). This is enough to make Ivory usable for me and worth paying for, but I’d love to be able to create filters, too, without dropping out to a separate web browser.
As a user of Tweetbot for something like a decade, I had hundreds and hundreds of items on my mute list. Mastodon’s ability to group them like “US politics”, “sportsball”, “job postings” makes them far easier to manage than tweetbot’s/ivory’s grouping by users, hashtags and keywords. Scrolling to find a certain filter and modify it (as I often did when I muted someone on my main feed after adding them to a list, but needed to ensure they weren’t muted in that list) became clunkier and clunkier over time, as the lists got longer.
@ivory @Velux another user begging for this, here! At minimum I’d love an option to “use server filters” where trying to mute something just opens a web browser to the server filters page, instead of the in-app filters.
I’m glad to have learned in another sub-thread that server side “hide completely” filters are implemented in ivory while “hide with a warning” are not (yet). This is enough to make Ivory usable for me and worth paying for, but I’d love to be able to create filters, too, without dropping...