Can someone explain why so many people are upset about this feature? I’ve seen talk about harassment being an issue with quote posts but I never got the connection. From what I saw, you can simply...
Can someone explain why so many people are upset about this feature? I’ve seen talk about harassment being an issue with quote posts but I never got the connection. From what I saw, you can simply disable the ability to quote your post, so if you do that, nothing really changes?
In my experience some of the worst behaviour on Twitter was enabled by quote tweets, I assume it's related to that. I can disable quoting my own posts because I don't like it, but if there are...
In my experience some of the worst behaviour on Twitter was enabled by quote tweets, I assume it's related to that. I can disable quoting my own posts because I don't like it, but if there are enough people around me that do like it, I would still expect that to become a more toxic environment.
Like what? I got on the Twitter train extremely early and got off a long time ago so this is one area of the internet I know nothing about. The only thing I can think of is directing people toward...
Like what? I got on the Twitter train extremely early and got off a long time ago so this is one area of the internet I know nothing about. The only thing I can think of is directing people toward a specific post and telling them to harass someone. But you can do that with a screenshot and an @ mention.
Quote posts (in my experience) tend to lead to a culture of "dunking" in which people broadcast their reply to some post via a quote as opposed to a direct reply, fragmenting the conversation...
Quote posts (in my experience) tend to lead to a culture of "dunking" in which people broadcast their reply to some post via a quote as opposed to a direct reply, fragmenting the conversation while also tailoring the audience to be a more favorable one to their view/reply since the quote is primarily seen by followers. This can direct more quotes/dunks at the original post even without a specific call for harassment. While you can do this with a screenshot and an @, having a quote feature lowers that barrier even further (its essentially a screenshot and @ hotkey). I also think people feel less inhibited to be assholes when they're talking about someone via a quote as opposed to talking to someone via a reply.
I think detaching quotes is a good remedy for these issues, for what its worth.
Thanks for the breakdown. It makes sense now why the people I’ve seen talking about this change negatively are LGBTQ+, since shitty people love to dogpile on us and that “fracturing” that takes...
Thanks for the breakdown. It makes sense now why the people I’ve seen talking about this change negatively are LGBTQ+, since shitty people love to dogpile on us and that “fracturing” that takes place makes it a lot easier for bad actors to start their own thread of replies for their followers to dogpile on.
And an @ doesn't take you to the exact post, just to their profile so now you have to scroll to give your opinion or reply randomly and it takes the wind out of your sails.
And an @ doesn't take you to the exact post, just to their profile so now you have to scroll to give your opinion or reply randomly and it takes the wind out of your sails.
Yeah exactly that. Every quote tweet is potentially a harassment campaign even if not intended, because the target is a single click away. People on Mastodon don't do the screenshot thing as far...
Yeah exactly that. Every quote tweet is potentially a harassment campaign even if not intended, because the target is a single click away. People on Mastodon don't do the screenshot thing as far as I've seen.
In my defense, I stopped seething when I moved to a better instance with superior moderation. These days I'm merely mildly perturbed!! But on a serious note, I'm forever amused that this feature--...
In my defense, I stopped seething when I moved to a better instance with superior moderation. These days I'm merely mildly perturbed!!
But on a serious note, I'm forever amused that this feature-- one that for some, has negative connotations as described below by Fiachra and gpl-- are a higher priority than actually reigning in all the bots, trolls, and harassment that come from those two "flagship" instances that will likely use Quote Post for evil.
Not sure what you mean? Instances (or more specifically, their admins) can de-federate from other instances. Mastodon also has a wide array of effective filtering tools. I'm fine with the main...
higher priority than actually reigning in all the bots, trolls, and harassment that come from those two "flagship" instances that will likely use Quote Post for evil.
Not sure what you mean? Instances (or more specifically, their admins) can de-federate from other instances. Mastodon also has a wide array of effective filtering tools.
I'm fine with the main project focusing on stability and features, especially when the existing features already let you do a sweeping ban on problematic instances.
The ability to defederate does not absolve admins of their instances to reign in their bad behavior. "Just defederate!" doesn't solve the active issues. Additionally, it's real wild that their...
The ability to defederate does not absolve admins of their instances to reign in their bad behavior. "Just defederate!" doesn't solve the active issues.
Additionally, it's real wild that their main instance doesn't seem to follow their own covenant-- which is required to have your own instance listed as a recommended server. Clearly a real "rules for thee but not for me" situation.
I may have misunderstood, are you saying mastodon.social is one of the problematic instances? If so, and if they are failing to moderate obvious abuse, harassment, etc. then yes, that is a...
I may have misunderstood, are you saying mastodon.social is one of the problematic instances?
If so, and if they are failing to moderate obvious abuse, harassment, etc. then yes, that is a problem. I'm not familiar enough with the instance to know how large the overlap is between application devs and instance moderators.
We are definitely on the same page about how instances should be moderated. But at the same time, each instance should retain the ability to moderate at their discretion, with the knowledge that other instances can de-federate from them. I don't want to have many moderation rules hardcoded, as that ruins the point of having separate instances. The centralization of moderation rules can pretty quickly lead to discrimination against many groups.
Idk, the instance I'm on is pretty chill. Smaller instance, but has a good number active so it does feel more like a community instead of yelling into the void, like Bluesky or modern Twitter (I...
Idk, the instance I'm on is pretty chill. Smaller instance, but has a good number active so it does feel more like a community instead of yelling into the void, like Bluesky or modern Twitter (I enjoyed Twitter a lot in the early years).
But since I mostly only interact with other instance members, that's prob why I don't see the constant gnashing of teeth. I mean we seethe as well, but it's more about the current state of the world, instead of the platform.
Personally, I'm happy for this feature. It was pretty clunky before to quote toots. Though I understand why some might not appreciate this feature.
When I was on Mastodon this sparked a whole black vs LGBT culture war as some vocal LGBT users were opposed to the feature existing as it got used on Twitter to harass LGBT users, while at the...
When I was on Mastodon this sparked a whole black vs LGBT culture war as some vocal LGBT users were opposed to the feature existing as it got used on Twitter to harass LGBT users, while at the same time some vocal black users were highlighting the lack of the feature as an example of not accommodating black people because the feature was commonly used within black circles on Twitter.
Can someone explain why so many people are upset about this feature? I’ve seen talk about harassment being an issue with quote posts but I never got the connection. From what I saw, you can simply disable the ability to quote your post, so if you do that, nothing really changes?
In my experience some of the worst behaviour on Twitter was enabled by quote tweets, I assume it's related to that. I can disable quoting my own posts because I don't like it, but if there are enough people around me that do like it, I would still expect that to become a more toxic environment.
Like what? I got on the Twitter train extremely early and got off a long time ago so this is one area of the internet I know nothing about. The only thing I can think of is directing people toward a specific post and telling them to harass someone. But you can do that with a screenshot and an @ mention.
Quote posts (in my experience) tend to lead to a culture of "dunking" in which people broadcast their reply to some post via a quote as opposed to a direct reply, fragmenting the conversation while also tailoring the audience to be a more favorable one to their view/reply since the quote is primarily seen by followers. This can direct more quotes/dunks at the original post even without a specific call for harassment. While you can do this with a screenshot and an @, having a quote feature lowers that barrier even further (its essentially a screenshot and @ hotkey). I also think people feel less inhibited to be assholes when they're talking about someone via a quote as opposed to talking to someone via a reply.
I think detaching quotes is a good remedy for these issues, for what its worth.
Thanks for the breakdown. It makes sense now why the people I’ve seen talking about this change negatively are LGBTQ+, since shitty people love to dogpile on us and that “fracturing” that takes place makes it a lot easier for bad actors to start their own thread of replies for their followers to dogpile on.
The smallest of inconveniences on social media, particularly on mobile, will deter people.
And an @ doesn't take you to the exact post, just to their profile so now you have to scroll to give your opinion or reply randomly and it takes the wind out of your sails.
Yeah exactly that. Every quote tweet is potentially a harassment campaign even if not intended, because the target is a single click away. People on Mastodon don't do the screenshot thing as far as I've seen.
Are Mastodon users ever not seething?
Eh? I've been on Maston for a few years. The users tend to be mellow. Older crowd, more international crowd, more diverse crowd, mostly IT people.
In my defense, I stopped seething when I moved to a better instance with superior moderation. These days I'm merely mildly perturbed!!
But on a serious note, I'm forever amused that this feature-- one that for some, has negative connotations as described below by Fiachra and gpl-- are a higher priority than actually reigning in all the bots, trolls, and harassment that come from those two "flagship" instances that will likely use Quote Post for evil.
Not sure what you mean? Instances (or more specifically, their admins) can de-federate from other instances. Mastodon also has a wide array of effective filtering tools.
I'm fine with the main project focusing on stability and features, especially when the existing features already let you do a sweeping ban on problematic instances.
The ability to defederate does not absolve admins of their instances to reign in their bad behavior. "Just defederate!" doesn't solve the active issues.
Additionally, it's real wild that their main instance doesn't seem to follow their own covenant-- which is required to have your own instance listed as a recommended server. Clearly a real "rules for thee but not for me" situation.
I may have misunderstood, are you saying mastodon.social is one of the problematic instances?
If so, and if they are failing to moderate obvious abuse, harassment, etc. then yes, that is a problem. I'm not familiar enough with the instance to know how large the overlap is between application devs and instance moderators.
We are definitely on the same page about how instances should be moderated. But at the same time, each instance should retain the ability to moderate at their discretion, with the knowledge that other instances can de-federate from them. I don't want to have many moderation rules hardcoded, as that ruins the point of having separate instances. The centralization of moderation rules can pretty quickly lead to discrimination against many groups.
Idk, the instance I'm on is pretty chill. Smaller instance, but has a good number active so it does feel more like a community instead of yelling into the void, like Bluesky or modern Twitter (I enjoyed Twitter a lot in the early years).
But since I mostly only interact with other instance members, that's prob why I don't see the constant gnashing of teeth. I mean we seethe as well, but it's more about the current state of the world, instead of the platform.
Personally, I'm happy for this feature. It was pretty clunky before to quote toots. Though I understand why some might not appreciate this feature.
When I was on Mastodon this sparked a whole black vs LGBT culture war as some vocal LGBT users were opposed to the feature existing as it got used on Twitter to harass LGBT users, while at the same time some vocal black users were highlighting the lack of the feature as an example of not accommodating black people because the feature was commonly used within black circles on Twitter.
On Mastodon, yes.
At least before I quit, I don't think that feature was on Twitter.