"Couldn't find Bluesky user" when user exists

[agharbeia]

What does it mean when Bridgy replies with "Couldn't find Bluesky user foo", while the user does exist, and the option to discourage logged-out access is not enabled?

For example: @0xa1ef.bsky.social

[snarfed]

Sorry for the trouble! Looks like this account doesn't pass our spam filters: https://fed.brid.gy/docs#troubleshooting

We should definitely make this message more clear though! That's #758 (comment). Thanks for the nudge.

[agharbeia]

Thanks for the explanation. A more descriptive message would be useful, indeed.

However, the reason for closing this ticket doesn't really reflect the intention here, right? It's a duplicate of #758, correct?

More importantly, please have a look at these other Bluesky accounts for which I had got the same response, but neglected mentioning in the issue report:

• rimaanabtawi.bsky.social
• ahmadelnemr.bsky.social

[agharbeia]

It would be useful to amend the documentation in order to cover:

• what happens when a Bluesky account that is the target of a bridging request is set to receiving messages only from accounts they follows, AND they are not following the robot.
• what actions are expected from the owner of the target account, if any.

Messages reporting errors, as in the subject of this issue, should contain a link to the troubleshooting section of the documentation.

Additionally, a follow-up message from the robot to the initiator of the bridging request is needed, after the bridging has been successful. Its content should cite the bridged account on the respective platform, similar to the message received when requesting the bridging of an account that's already bridged.

[snarfed]

Agreed on all counts!

It's a duplicate of #758, correct?

Correct, specifically this one part: #758 (comment)

• rimaanabtawi.bsky.social
• ahmadelnemr.bsky.social

These accounts both have the "hide account in logged out view" setting enabled, as mentioned in https://fed.brid.gy/docs#troubleshooting .

• what happens when a Bluesky account that is the target of a bridging request is set to receiving messages only from accounts they follows, AND they are not following the robot.

This is #1326

Additionally, a follow-up message from the robot to the initiator of the bridging request is needed, after the bridging has been successful.

This is #1024

[agharbeia]

Great. Thanks for this great work. It's very useful.

I've also read your post about institutionalizing this, and I hope it is realized one way or the other.

[agharbeia]

• what happens when a Bluesky account that is the target of a bridging request is set to receiving messages only from accounts they follows, AND they are not following the robot.

This is #1326

Friends helping me understand/debug the process reported having received/seen the robot's message after following the robot's account, even though the message itself was sent before they did so.

But I must say I don't understand how Bluesky messaging works, and whether there's a retry window, or whether the relevant setting is just a filter on the view.

In all cases, it would be great, in addition to the DM, to mention the case in the docs.

[Tamschi]

Bluesky has slightly strange behaviour if someone tries to DM without permission (at the protocol level): The DM is apparently still received, but just hidden from the recipient until the sender is allowed to send it.

Bridgy Fed probably sends the DM without checking for permission first, so #1326 should help with this too.

[audunmb]

While the underlying issue is difficult to solve, I think this issue should be resolved trough a more clear message. Something like:
"Couldn't find user foo on Bluesky, or the user couldn't be reached" would make more sense.