I don't feel as strongly about quote posts as I did in 2018. Personally, I am not a fan, but there is clearly a lot of demand for it. We're considering it.
TY! It was a very useful feature to be able add to a conversation without feeling like we were spamming ppl's replies. But I can see why you chose not to have it here given the way ppl abuse it.
If you do add it, you should make it so people can opt to have their posts “quote posted.” If the setting is on, people can do it. If not, then they can only boost.
You can even have it apply per post settings as well. Just a few suggestions.
Quote post isn't engaging, its used in an inflammatory way in most cases.
Those that want it should learn how to engage with the posters, not quote post.
In my opinion, I would not want to see the environment be altered here due to twitter migrants who want what they had there. But hey thats just my opinion.
If we did do it we'd like to make it something you can opt out of, in a similar way to how we plan to allow disabling replies. It's not entirely trivial.
I think not having quotes is the best thing about here. On the bird site my time line was full of people quote tweeting the extreme right to rant about how bad they were. This massively increased the rights reach. Without quote toots my time line is calm and I can believe the human race is not totally lost
opt out as the person being quoted or the person following an account that uses quotes? Also kudos, I personally like (and miss!) Quotes and respect that you are revisiting your position! 👍
Do you think having quote-replies enable by default or disabled by default would be best? Would it be an account-wide setting that could be changed on a per-post basis as well?
I liked an idea I heard from @alasaarela where he considered being able to do either a quote-boost (above) or a comment-boost (below), depending on the situation.
donc l'un des fondateurs/développeurs de Masto revient sur sa pensée initiale et pense mettre en place les citations, comme sur Twitter, mais avec la possibilité de ne pas les autoriser individuellement... Pourquoi pas...
Providing an opt out option is a great idea. It is an important feature to give the original post more power. It will also reduce negative use of the #QT.
Overt harassment is one of the reasons quote-tweets are harmful. Opt-out could solve this, but ONLY if it's retro-active, and deletes already existing quote-toots.
The other, far more common, way the feature is harmful to Twitter is that it encourages people to believe that amplifying harmful voices is the correct and proper way to respond to them. But in practice, Twitter has shown that amplifying harmful voices, even to criticize them with a brilliant bon mot, normalizes the harmful voices and helps them gain acceptance.
I don't think that opt-out solves that problem, because the most harmful voices are the ones most eager for any kind of attention, so of course they'll opt in.
it's not trivial at all! Doing it safely, will take a lot of people hours to actually moderate, and software support for actually doing that moderation... and more!
The reasons for not having them are valid. So are the reasons for having them.
I would strongly suggest seeking guidance from folks like @timnitGebru and others she recommends.
We can make a difference and build software that supports human efforts to do better. We just need to listen, and listen again.
the problem I see is that if someone posts something spiteful or disgusting it gets amplified. Even though lots of people will QT with stuff like 'I can't believe they posted this' it still gets seen by more people than it deserves and the hate poster is happy that they're getting attention.
I appreciate you and your team listening to the discussion and reconsidering your position. I hope you'll be able to implement the multi-level permissions that have been suggested — not just on or off, but the ability to limit QT to followers, followed, and/or mutuals would be greatly appreciated as well, but if that's too difficult, just a simple on-off setting would be better than nothing.
- opt-out per posts and default setting - option not to get mention by quotes and default setting - option not to fetch quotes by following and default setting
Question out of interest: What is the argument against an opt-in solution? So that by default the quoting of posts would be disabled (so the current state) and the administration of a Fediverse instance must activate this?😅😇😊
I'm still not a fan tbh, but we'll adapt like with any change. Personally I strongly favor an opt-in rather than opt-out. Maybe run a poll on those options? 😎
this seems like a measured and reasonable approach, thank you. As a Johhny-come-lately, QT is the one thing I miss the most from my near decade on the birdsite. In my fandom community, we mostly used it to boost while gushing over the thing we were boosting, or to add our perspective to a thing we saw. I get that it can be abused, but with the real live moderation here, that kind of bs can be nipped in the bud, and we could be free to gush in peace. 🥰🥰🥰
I sympathize with the argument I've seen that it feels like the added portion to the quoted post adds very little, usually. But I think that it's no less trivial than any given random user's sparsely viewed posts anyway, and alas, I and clearly many others are still trying to find a way to share posts and our replies to them in an intuitive way.
One way I've seen is someone replying to a post and boosting their reply. On birdsite, replies and QTs were super separate threads, but maybe on Mastodon they could be implemented as a type of reply that simultaneously boosts (at least from a UI design perspective) both posts together? What I mean is a reply that shows in my followers feeds and displays the replied-to post above it, thread style. Perhaps this could also help with the issue of implementing permissions controlled by the original poster.
can you opt out seeing quote toots? Because they often are performative acts of anger. "See how angry i am about this toot". Not seeing this kind of content is the main reason for me to stay here.
But I think that's part of why it's important to implement it. There are plenty of people, including myself, talking about putting in some sort of patch that server owners can install to allow this sort of quote-and-reply boosting, and even a couple of implementations that have been done. One of the problems is that people who for whatever reason don't want that happening can't opt out, and another one is that there isn't a standardized method for it. I think having the central repo add it would do a lot in terms of setting a standard, even if people continue to make alternate versions: at the very least, I think we'd respect that opt-out feature.
haven't read ever reply but I would suggest, if one one has already, to implement an option for admins to disable such feature for an instance. Maybe even prohibit other instances from quoting.
I'm surprised. I would have assumed that post-Gamergate (2015) insights about the undesirable social use of QT to encourage dogpiling etc. would become solidified following the Infodemic (2020), Jan6 (2021), and the disclosures made by FB civic integrity PM and whistleblower Haugen (2021-2022). Just last week, this article specifically pointed to QT as a problem, and to decentralized social platforms as our hope: theswaddle.com/how-the-interne…
Saw a somewhat charming approach some days ago. Instead of embedding the other post, the original post was shown prior in the feed, and the „quoting post“ as a response. This way it is possible to refere to another post in a direct way, but the initial post is still prioritized. This could be a good compromise from my view.
In this case this was a solution on the App side, which just worked when reply and boost were in the same timeframe.
Please consider using opt-in as a default approach rather than opt-out. It is so much cleaner for new people to first understand what the ramifications of certain features are before opting in, than having a laundry list for new people where you say "quick turn of search engine indexing, quoting, this that and the next thing". Opt-out makes onboarding more daunting, and it is used so cynically on commercial offerings to extract value.
QTs strip context. If we do QTs, they should probably note whether quote is part of thread or discussion.
The goal should be to show the right amount of info to emphasize that the reader should look further and not simply take the most immediately quoted toot at face value.
Shouldn't notification by quote be opt-in rather than opt-out? I've once seen a screenshot by a victim who was bullied through a QT on Twitter by someone who the victim doesn't know. The first notification seemed to be enough to make a big damage to the victim.
By default only posts with hashtags can be quoted (after all, they are intended to be fairly public).
Accounts can change to AlwaysAllow if they are, for instance, a news or campaign organisation or just want their Mastodon experience to be more public.
Accounts can change to AlwaysBlock if they are concerned about abuse or wish their Mastodon experience to be more intimate.
I'm fine like this, but in case you will change your mind, would you please consider the option of a feature enabling admins to disable quote replies at instance level? This will allow to remove at local level a potentially toxic feature whose absence was wisely enforced by design up to now. Thanks!
QTs weren't something that I thought about until coming here and reading your and others thoughts on the negative points about them. Which convinced me to be opposed to them.
So if you so add the feature I'd prefer an opt-in rather than opt-out.
I'm not sure opt-in would work though because I guess people wouldn't opt-in in enough numbers to make it useful for those that do want it.
personally not a fan of quote replies, being able to opt out of them sounds good in theory, but then if a user opts out they then run the risk of losing possible engagement on a toot, from someone who might only engage because of the quote reply function.
I don't feel as strongly about quote posts as I did in 2018. Personally, I am not a fan, but there is clearly a lot of demand for it. We're considering it.
I think this would be a bad idea, and for exactly the same reasons you ruled it out before. It seems to me those looking for this are new here (as I am). They are just the loudest voices, as no one shouts much to retain a status quo. It's not needed, if they want they can put the direct link to a toot in their text. It will be used to dunk on users. Of that there's no doubt
's plan to modify Mastodon to disable replies strikes me as profoundly misguided and likely to make fighting disinformation and lies more difficult.
No one who makes a public statement should have either the right or means to constrain replies -- whether positive or negative. If it is within one's right to speak, it is certainly within another's right to respond.
I wish you wisdom. I do personally not miss the functionality and am, after eight weeks of tooting, quite convinced that your arguments for not implementing it are as valid now as they were then and increase the value of the platform. Just my two cents, mind.
Just a suggestion: An opt out/in setting not just with "allow/disallow" but with the values "allow all users, only allow followed users, only allow mentioned users, disallow all users" as an account setting with the option to change it per toot.
This sounds like a good compromise. I'd like to have a quote function. Then I can explain, why I boost something and it's helpful for people who follow me to engage with me as well.
I do believe that the absence of quote-tweets is something that really makes a conversation healthier here. I still remember Twitter introducing quote-tweets and it starting slam-dunks from all sides of the spectrum.
Honestly, I'd be more for quote posts than turning off replies. Turning off replies is how people put disinformation out while limiting the ability of others to comment. I think its one of the more problematic things the bird site ever did.
I see corporations and hateful people limiting replies far more often than I see it from any other group.
Sounds great! An account wide preset combined with granular control on each post would be nice. It's sad that quoting on Twitter was often used in a bad way, but sometimes I just want to post a "Hey, look at this artist!" with a bit more context for my bubble. It works without quoting but it feels like when you're in a conversation and can't pull out your phone to quickly show people what you're actually talking about.
I don't have strong feelings either way. I tended to use it on Twitter in a positive way: perhaps to support an opinion, or often to boost a new initiative or book, giving my opinion on why it's worthwhile. However, I have seen too many pile-ons started by QTs, and I quite understand why many people here are against them.
So if it is introduced, I think the default should be opt-in. Make it as easy as possible for people to have a good experience.
More than just opting in on having your posts quoted, I hope we will be able to opt out of seeing them in our Home timeline. One of the under discussed worst aspects of quote tweets is mutuals using them bring stuff you try to avoid into your timeline. Like popular accounts you don’t necessarily want to block or mute, but don’t follow, but since folks want to add their two cents there they are.
I am making good use of the filter to hide bird site links and would really appreciate a tic-box there to opt out of seeing quotes or being (ab)used via quotes. I appreciate that others would see it more positively though.
as a victim of harassment, I strongly support quoted posts. Users will always be cited by people at other instances by copying and pasting the post URL. But if I am not warned about it, I cannot check if the quote is a loyal comment or plain defamation.
As a first-pass, the privacy setting of the post should be sufficient: if the post is public (i.e not unlisted, not followers-only), then it's fair game for QPs. If, for whatever reason, the original author wants to limit access after-the-fact, then changing the privacy setting for the post from public -> unlisted would achieve the desired effect
From an implementation standpoint, QPs could be implemented as a fully-rendered embed of the output from the /embed API endpoint
Not sure how that would help, you can still quote post with a screenshot and that doesn't address if someone retracts or edits a post. I'd rather have that chance to fix or clarify a post the someone quotes then just blocking it.
could you also please make it so that a quote-boost of a public toot CANNOT be locked/private or instance-only? I think that would do the most good toward reducing harm and discouraging the negative use cases seen on Twitter.
Could instances choose to disregard the opt out setting though? Then it becomes moot with all the issues that can follow? I get that quoting is convenient but the same can be achieved with a bit less convenience and by using the link to a particular toot?
Please look at issue 20673. It's got a lot of noise but good work on how the logic for this could work. See my comments (buried somewhere near the middle at this point) for good summary.
I remember why you did not want the quote posts and I still think you was right.
I understand that Twitter users feel more comfortable to be on a similar "environment" but this is not Twitter and some of us we are here exactly for that.
that would be great! Then people who don’t want it can duck the downsides and it can foster communication, growth, journalism, etc. I’m delighted to learn you are considering this!! Please do it.
I’d wait out the current moment. I joined, and said ‘where’s the quote post?’ It’s not necessary, and if someone really feels the need, they can comment in their own toot and post a link. There are a lot of new users who need to live with/use the app as it is before deciding. Demand may fade.
What about making them a #QuoteReply (roughly equivalent to a repost with additional reply text)? This avoids the problem of splitting the conversation, instead encouraging interaction with the original poster. See here for proposal and discussion: fediphilosophy.org/@keithwilso…
is there any way to make it easier to see the captioning for the visually impaired, when composing it? I have visual issues myself and find it hard to see the letters when composing. They seem to be partially covered by the keyboard and the white font makes it difficult for me to see on top off the image. I’m new here and it could be the way I have set it up. Thank you 🙏
I advise it to make it opt-in by default and make the opt-out/opt-in question configurable for server admins in config/setting.yml. I also would make bots always opt-out.
I also have a related idea about account presets. That people can choose at sign-up (or later if they want) what kind of account they want with associated settings. The account preset 'journalism and media' would e.g. enable QT's, enable discoverable, enable search indexing, etc. On the other site will the account preset 'as private as possible' enable all privacy features, post visibility to followers only, lock account, etc. Just an idea that popped out in my head. Maybe I need make it a Github issue.
rather default setting was off for that feature with an “opt in” option. QT is not that desirable. If you’re going to re-blog a post, commentary should come after the “RT” not as a header as is current with QT on the bird site. And remember, we called them Re-Tweets and had to copy paste and append RT manually.
As a long time consumer of online communities, my sense it that the real danger with Quote Posts isn't harrasment (which can happen plenty of other ways), but they help basic misunderstandings to accelerate into angry conflict.
Giving the user the choice should greatly address that concern w/people who don't want that drama. The worst dog pile I was under came via friendly accounts after one person amplified one misunderstood one post in a thread.
I would say stick to no explicit quote tweet behavior but handle it however you handle the preview of links to mastodon posts and potentially allow masking of the preview
Also, please include a feature to stop seeing any further QTs of a given post. If everyone is dunking on the same awful post, I don't want to have to see the same awful post over and over again
I clicked on the OP to suggest that you could definitely implement it in such a way that would uphold your original reasoning for not including it. Glad you've already put thought into it.
Just to raise a question, as I don't know enough about the technical aspects even to speculate properly. Possible for "disallow quotes" be retroactive? If the option is on & a post goes unexpectedly out of control, could users have the option to make the quote-posts vanish? Maybe not as effective as just deleting & maybe overly complicated. Not sure. This is just brainstorming. But it's often incredibly difficult to predict what goes viral--or even a few steps in that direction.
how can anyone possibly know how a quoted toot is going to be recontextualize in advance of allowing or disallowing it to be quoted. Consent is meaningless when outcome is unknowable. Retracting consent or consenting per quote is impossible / impractical. We have a garbage website for dog-piles, it’s garbage. Please not on #mastodon
This helps make Mastodon and the #Fediverse an improvement over the failing bird site. I missed being able to quote-toot when I first arrived but it didn’t take long to realize it was just a habit and adjust. I’ve seen numerous others saying similar. The folks who are the most vociferous on this appear to have not even tried to adjust, they just want the other site without the new order/owner. A very granular (toot-level) opt-in function would be ok, but not just an on/off per account…
An opt-out seems like the way to go. I personally do want QT but I think good faith users wouldn’t be looking to QT those who opt out anyway.
Mainly I think people (not looking to harass others) want to share posts that expect/want to be shared (news, articles, this thread) to their own followers and just add their comment or context.
I'll take it. Hell, here's one further suggestion:
Make it per-profile-optional. Toot itself contains a hint that it's a QRT, and each profile itself has a choice in their options to "Show Quoted Toot", "Show 'Show Quoted Toot' Buttton", or "Do not show quoted toot" (so, combo box).
The joy of Mastodon is that it is a conversation not a soapbox or clout platform. Replies are central to conversation, the distancing of a QT is not. If really needed, a link works fine. I’m new to actually being active here (set up an account in ‘17 but didn’t use it) and seems to me we should spend some time getting comfortable with the culture that’s been built before insisting you move the furniture around.
displaying the quote above the responding text, allowing people to choose not to allow themselves to be quoted, and notifying the quoted user of the quote would together make a compelling difference from Twitter usage and solve real problems.
If you do allow QTs, I'd like to see them automatically inserted in the replies to the toot being quoted. That way, people would be sharing the OT while also contributing to the conversation rather than derailing it.
Developer Chris Wetherell built Twitter’s retweet button. And he regrets what he did to this day.
“We might have just handed a 4-year-old a loaded weapon,” Wetherell recalled thinking as he watched the first Twitter mob use the tool he created. “That’s what I think we actually did.”
“The biggest problem is the quote retweet,” [head of Product] Goldman told BuzzFeed News. “Quote retweet allows for the dunk. It’s the dunk mechanism.”
One of the most important features is visibility into "who is linking/quoting to my post [within ActivityPub]" to enable someone to block the primary source of harassment. But especially on a decentralized protocol like ActivityPub, that's nontrivial to say the least, and most (but not all) approaches would be inevitably incomplete.
I spent a while today on the birdsite. QTs seem to be used almost entirely to stoke outrage. I can’t say I miss them, or the constant “be offended by this!” noise.
The only way I'd like to see this happen, especially if you're going to let people opt-out of replies, is tie quotes to replies.
If a reply is boosted it should quote the post it's replying to for context when you see the boosted reply by itself in your feed (without having to click through to see the OP). That would allow people to quote post only by boosting a reply, which would also preserve your original argument against quoting in favor of replying.
"quote posts" should be a type of reply. ie: quoting a post doesn't escape the thread, it just boosts the thread in your own TL at the same time as replying.
That's my only objection to a "quote" feature: it encourages drive-by comments about another thread, rather than promoting discussion within the original.
example UI: a tickbox when writing a reply which says "also boost", and on your TL it boosts the OP while also making your reply visible. Call it a boost-reply.
Hey, Eugen. I think quotes are a nice feature to have, it allows users to speak about topics without losing context. Yeah, quotes could be used to harass someone but having settings to handle them should be a must. Personally, I hate quotes from private accounts where you cannot reply.
Thank you. I'm glad you're thinking carefully about it. That's even more important than the added features - that you're considering the impact. This is such a friendly place!
the opt out feature would be great. Although I’m sure this would not be simple either - another modified option would be the ability to quote our own prior posts. It would allow everyone to quickly reference things we have said before that we want to add on to, without imposing the feature on others.
You can provide an opt out position on quote posts. But that doesn't address the fact that it can be used to help both the quote poster and the one being quoted. If someone insists they can't be quote posted they'll simply have their words provided without proof the entire meaning was provided. If someone thinks they're not being treated fairly by a quote poster they can complain and if they don't get satisfaction, they can block the offender. That seems a better approach to me.
you could push quote toot responses into the thread.
So, allow people ( subject to opt ins/outs) to quote a post, but if someone replies, then it forms part of the original thread, rather than some off kilter side shoot. Might need a little label maybe (user x quote tooted) or some other indicator.
Given that one can already reply and then boost one's reply, could QT on Mastodon merely combine those operations into one step? QTs elsewhere are toxic because the original author has no visibility or control/influence, whereas replies (such as this, which I'll boost) could be the way to go. #QuoteToot #QuotePost #MastodonEvolution
Good afternoon. Happy New Year’s. I hope all is well. I wanted to share some false news that is being spread on Mastodon. May you please look at what disclose.tv on Twitter is posting about us. Thank you. I am absolutely outraged by this behavior. It appears they are posting this information to hurt us. I posted the link. Please take a look at what this individual has posted. Have a good day ser.
A fine compromise. My bet? After 6 months, not even 5% will opt-out, and that number will shrink quickly as people realize that much of the "abuse" was never a real issue (the moderation was). But your better reason, imo, that it promoted a lesser kind of engagement, may still prove accurate. I personally doubt it, but it might. Either way, it will be what it will. Time will tell. Thanks for revisiting it.
I think this would be a good mix, having the feature but letting people opt-out of having posts quoted. That way, if someone is very much against the feature or has been trolled by people using it (as many of us have experienced on Twitter), then we have the option to disable that feature.
I think any form of quote toot would kneecap the platform's appeal to me. On the one hand you've got the timeline filling up with posts from like, parlor.toot because some well meaning doofus wanted to quote it and get their dunks in, on the other hand if you can toggle it off, you miss good people using it to hype up other good people with glowing reviews or recommendations.
My gut feeling tells me that that demand is coming mostly from people who came over here from Birdsite last year. Because the other site had it is not a good reason for introducing it - you should look at the quality of the demand, not the quantity.
One of the things that makes the conversations in this place more friendly is that we to NOT have this feature. Individually opting out will not fix the problems it introduces by people talking ABOUT instead of TO each other. #mastodon
Do not collapse into another site's UX just from pressure. Please consult the UX research on how such a feature impacts discourse, and make the choice, either way, with eyes open.
It may well tilt interactions here toward animosity.
The addition of quote boosts is unlikely to significantly increase adoption.
Let new features improve things, not merely mimic.
A noisy constituency should not rule the day just because they're loud.
It seems that on the bird site there are two main kinds of quote tweets: the equivalent of a boost but with an extra comment from the booster, and the "dunk", the "look at this idiot" quote tweet. Perhaps the software could provide the feature but moderators could rule out the second kind as abusive.
I felt it was missing when I joined as part of the great #twittermigration but now I find I interact more with people by responding. It is much better to have a discussion with someone about what they say, rather than to start a conversation away from them saying ‘guess what X said…’
Thank you. This is how a platform that values community should develop. As the needs of the community evolve, thank you for being open to new views. Making it optional is a good way to let the community decide whether to use the feature or not depending on how it works in the real world.
For me why it is a valuable option is sometimes a post triggers a thought that is adjacent to the topic and a reply seems like the wrong way to enter the conversation. Sometimes it’s useful as linking to evidence or fact checking to a point you’re making. It’s can be valuable tool.
as a former fan of the quote post I think it'd be a bad step for the platform. Rarely does it encourage debate and more often than not it's used primarily to snipe at other users without having to engage with them.
I am so happy! Clearly you have an open mind 😊 Thank you VERY much for both recognizing the strong demand for #QT and reconsidering this feature. This is one of the many values I connect with through #Mastodon !
This is cool. If you do end up implementing something, I think it’s a great opportunity to rethink how it works rather just copying over the Twitter feature. (Personally, I’m in favor of making the quoted post more prominent and the “commentary” less so.)
I missed it when I first joined back in 2019, but now I get the resistance.
I've been saying for a while now that it's important to think about how the features of an application influence the use of the application.
Quote posts are definitely at this category. I believe they have (unintentionally) promoted a less healthy environment that leads to dog-piling and brigading, and detract from direct conversation.
I feel this would have a seriously negative impact on Mastodon.
IMHO the central question is, if these should be "contextualized" boosts or just posts on their own, linking/embedding another post like we have it on #friendica.
On #birdsite quoted reposts keep a link to the original post for metrics so it became a special kind of reply. If it is just a quote, perhaps the quotee should get some notification (by mentioning) and the link is put below the comment. But those are just my two cents.
I don't feel as strongly about quote posts as I did in 2018. Personally, I am not a fan, but there is clearly a lot of demand for it. We're considering it.
It seems like a big part of the abuse potential of the QT is that the “quoter” appears above the “quoted” which allows them to recontextualize the quote - the reader sees the new context and the “quote” is boxed in to some uncharitable reading. QT with the quoter beneath the quoted might make a difference?
I use quote posts for curating: adding local context and making connections, in order to interest people to investigate ideas/articles that may not be obvious from the original poster's text. I'm a bumble-bee, I cross-pollinate and spread ideas into new fields 😀
With a quote, both my addition (as a pointer) and the original (the substance) are visible; but here, doing it inelegantly with Reply, the substance is hidden in the timeline :-\
Thanks for considering it. #QuoteReply instead of #QuotePost might also be an option. Whether displayed above or below OP, replies won't get forked. Moreover limiting and/or hiding replies would be great.
thank you for listening to the community! Quotes are an essential part of multi-party conversations, and conversations are a much richer way to communicate than people reacting and boosting a few influencers posts. Because Mastodon doesn't have algorithms that optimize for toxicity, the threat is smaller.
please don't. One of the reasons users came to Mastodon before birdsite exodus was the absence of echo chamber. I read the discussions to add quoting but to my understanding it was requested just to make Mastodon as similar to users' former platform as possible. Mastodon stands out as a social platform of its own strengths. Please let's not drag in baggage of other sites just to make it less diverse.
There we go. "opting" is for few. The rest will be Twitterisierung. But as a newbie, too, I should not have a horse in the race. The silent bad faith actors will enjoy how loud "good" actors are helping them. But difficult of course simply by loud demand in the wave of gentrification by (us) twitter movers (and workarounds punching holes). "I want" vs restraints normally has a forseeable outcome.
Since pretty much moving to Mastodon 100%, I haven't missed them one little bit. Whenever I do do dip my toe back into the other place, I'm confronted with retweets of the worst people (who I'm here to get away from), amplified in order to decry them. It's to get precious likes and follows, of course, but it means the worst tweets get the most amplified by both followers and detractors.
better make it smth to toggle because quote retweets were used to incite harassment. As in, if i want my post to be quote-posted then i should be able to turn that on/off.
I don't like the quoting feature, that kept me out if Twitter. Please, if you set a quoting feature, make out/off the default for our toots, and give us some control over quotes showed in out timeline, it could become endless.
I still don’t really like the idea of quote posting. I think it makes the platform less social. When I was quoted on twitter it felt more like someone was pointing me out in a crowd to make some comment to their friends (whether it was positive or negative). Replies are just inherently more conversational which based on my priorities is better.
That's real cool to hear! One of the things that I disliked about Mastodon when I first encountered it about 5 years ago was the lack of an ability to boost someone's post while writing it on your timeline, or to put your own reply on your own timeline with their post for context when you wanted people to see it. I think any sort of functionality that allows that sort of interplay, even if it's just the ability to link replies to your own timeline and have it show the post you're replying to for context, would really facilitate that sort of content.
please don’t. We all survived for many year at the other place without QT but the place went downhill fast when they were introduced. The journalists especially can do their jobs without and report what a person has said rather than stick an editorial rider above it. And organisers of pile-ons can’t direct their troops onto the hapless — a bit of inconvenience is a small price to pay for eliminating that grotesqueness.
maybe it can be done differently. For example „boosting comment” - so somebody is commenting, but marking field and orginal post is apearing on their timeline with their comment as new toot, and same comment is under orinal post as part of discussion? Just a thought 😅
That's great. Your original statement about why you rejected them makes no sense and doesn't fit at all with the direct experience of many users who have experienced the worst online harassment. Quote-posting was *not* the driver of harassment you think it was, and serves many, many useful curatorial and educational functions for scientists, as just one example.
Time and again I feel that I need quote posts here, but eventually I find it exciting and refreshing to deal with them missing.
Because they sure will surface some bad behavior of me... Maybe you should be able to toggle off quotes for yourself, too, so you have a threshold and are less tempted. Maybe it should ask you before quoting if you are about to say something nice, and if not if you wouldn't rather just block the person.
But I am happy for all those quote enthuasiasts if the feature is coming. Thank you for your efforts anyway 😀
Although I used quote tweets on the bird app, I usually only added an actual quote from articles I was tweeting. However, I did get trolled by quote tweets--so I'd like to be able to block trolls from doing that on here.
I've been here about 6 weeks now and I've adjusted to the space I have opted to join. There's a lot of demand for sugar but it doesn't make it better for us. I'm wondering how much extra work it may it may not create for site moderators. Not that I know an awful lot. Moving to Mastadon has reminded me how basic my IT skills are. I'm okay with being humbled.
Thanks! I'd suggest 3-fold support: - Users can opt-in to allowing quote posts (in general) - A user can allow a quote-post on an individual toot -If a user feels a toot is being abused through a quote-post, they can disable it for the post retrospectively & revoke any quote-posts that had been done.
I’m sure you’ve heard this from others, but would love if you considered making them tumblr-style reblogs, where the commentary goes below the original post! Feels a lot more collaborative that way ❤️
my two cents: this feature should not be added unless it is supported by ActivityPub. Breaking compatibility with the rest of the Fediverse defeats the primary goal of the project.
If that means getting the standard updated first, so be it. There is no rush. We've been making do without this feature since the beginning.
Must confess I used Twitter on a daily basis for several years and never even knew quote tweeting was a thing. (If you wonder how that's possible, I had a standing rule to never read replies there.) But here, it would have been handy on several occasions when I wanted to respond to a particular idea someone posted. Threads get chaotic and difficult to follow, so the ability to quote would be useful. I made do the old-school way, with copy and paste.
I don't really need them & I don't mind them. But recently I have realized that sometimes people might want to boost something that is in another language and translate it into the main language of their audience. In such cases, that feature would be very useful.
Please don’t. Having been active here for a little while it has become increasingly obvious that there is nothing that quote posts add that cannot be achieved in other, more constructive ways.
You seem to have found an elusive behavioural ‘nudge’ that encourages engagement while discouraging polarisation and tribalism. Don’t let the Twitter influx persuade you to turn Mastodon into another Twitter. Thank you!
It's no secret that bad actors on the bird site get their controversial (and often quite vile) posts in front of more people using QR's - how will Mastodon tackle this? My twitter timeline is virtually unreadable because of QR's from well meaning people boosting the worst of the worst, I don't see how limiting who can QR your own tweets isn't going to stop this on Mastodon
would it be possible to give the person quoted some degree of control? For example, if they blocked the quoter, maybe they would no longer show up in the quoted post.
This seems like a compromise that might mitigate the bullying problem a bit.
I think it's now effectively a referendum on changing the culture to something with the risks and benefits of Twitter. It seems to me the core aim is to make it easier to use social media for influence, clout, and manipulation vs than "same-level" communication. It'll always be claimed to be for the greater good of course.
One question is whether you want the responsibility for mitigating the known risks of empowering that culture. Or is the next step "helpful" volunteers taking over?
can you start by improving link previews for posts and makes sure that links to Fediverse content federates correctly? This alone would fix much of the issues of QT even without a specific UI
please consider the effects of QTs - for example those who use it are often those who don’t want a proper conversation, because you can’t follow the conversation easily. It is commonly used by right wing journalists and MPs to encourage a pile on. Not having it is refreshing!
please, by Default opt in. Some of us do not need quote posts. Or that the Option is available only to people who activate it on settings. Something like that
Another thing I still miss is to get some sort of "view" of what is actively spoken about on the network, or at least in *my* network. I know I can search for / follow hashtags, but something like a wordcloud of frequently used terms in my network would be nice.
I'm not a fan either. I was a Twitter user before quote tweets were introduced and I really think it changed the platform. I think opting out will only work if we can opt out of seeing other people's quotes. Thanks for all you do!
please don’t do this, quote tweeting is mostly folks trying to dunk on one another with bs hot takes, there’s no need for that here and Mastodon is better without it.
If folks want to quote tweet, let ‘‘em do it old school style and copy/paste with rt tag.
I donate to #mastodon project mainly to get quote posts.
When you eliminate the #algorithm that incentives nastiness to generate more impressions for more ad revenue then it removes incentive to abuse quote posts.
Quoting would be a nice feature for various reasons, but it could also be an unnecessary torture. I feel that it's okay to be quoted when someone wants to boost + express their opinion in one post without taking part in the conversation. Not having to be notified, or see, that someone quoted you (at least as an option) would save a lot of mental work and energy to people getting upset, having to block, mute, get back at, etc. And it prevents active misquoting, right?
I don't like them but I also don't care that much about it.
My view is that Quoting detracts from the original post and puts the focus on the quoter. Any boosts or likes on the quote are not reflected as boosts or likes on the original, unless you make some interesting technical decisions 😅.
Knowing the reach and effect of your post is useful and quoting will dull that ability. It will effectively give a tool for influencers and trolls.
I don’t see any good reason to enable quote posts and some strong reasons not to. I’d go even further and crack down on screencap posts that are used for the same nasty hatchet job.
@Billie Please don't, the Fediverse and also Mastodon have developed like this so far and after years here you also notice the positive effect precisely because of the lack of it.
Yes, the demand for it comes back with every wave and it makes you tired, but we should still not introduce it.
It is precisely the lack of it that makes for better discussions, and those who have good reasons for it can do so easily by another means.
I like mastodon for how it encourages original posting not making remarks on other’s post. Personally not a fan of quote boosts. May make citing easier so people can comment on toots on timelines when needed?
it'll be hundreds and hundreds of quote-boosts that just say "yep" "this" "same" . It will dilute out the actually interesting, unique content that makes this place special now. If they say they're "thinking about it" then it's already going to happen, which is really too bad. It was one of my favorite things here.
I believe there's an item in the tracker for it? And it includes settings in the account "allow quote posts" and per toot settings "account default/allow quote/disallow quote"?
how about opting in or out (which would also show/hide QTs from display) and auto opt out if you have less than certain number of followers, and maybe a trial period.
I recently read that the lack of this feature is responsible for the other demeanour of people here. You can't toot just to your bubble, everything you toot is visible for all, this makes it harder to rally warriors against others. With that in mind, I think it's better to continue to do without it.
By the way: Thanks for this wonderful platform. I'm amazed about the decent and civilized exchange here. For me, this makes it a place where I like to take part in. 🙏 🙏 🙏
When I follow a new person on Birdsite, the very first thing I do is disable rebirds by that person. I hate people boosting something without adding their view or opinion on the matter. If I follow you, I want YOUR opinion, not that of a stranger. Contrary to most, I think quoted boosts should be the only kind of boosts allowed. I would definitely appreciate the option to see only quoted boosts and hide all others.
to date not having QT is the best argument I use to persuade people to join Mastodon... It really helps to make people thing about talking To rather than About someone else.
Thank you for considering it! can you also consider how to make mastodon's version if you implement it work interoperably with the rest of the fediverse that already has it? it would be great if it could display properly across platforms.
One benefit is that people see straight off the bat, that the quote really is from the quoted person. Not just propaganda. I see this as an improvement against dis- and misinformation.
The point of adding a quote-post feature is to allow users to add context to items already shared on Mastodon servers without having to go through extra steps. Some prefer to limit discussion by hiding behind the lie that the tools create the culture, when it's the other way around. Those insisting on being able to opt out or prevent their posts from being quoted ignore that such can be done by simply going to followers-only mode.
the lack of quote tweets makes for a calmer and friendlier network, I've found, with less focus on engagement and the negative effects of pile-ons. I hope it's not added.
But if it is added, I also hope there's an option to turn that off, and turn it off in bulk.
listening to the consumers is good. But don't listen to their every demand. Especially the ones from #twittermigration. I personally want the ability to follow someone but not see their posts on my feed cause I want to add them to separate lists and only look at them at decided times
Please don't. Mastodon ran well for years, apparently, nobody seemed to want it. Then with the sudden influx from Twitter (me included) there is a call for quote posts. Can't we just give it time beofre making changes? It seems to me that people want to make it twitter v2. Exepct an increase in bullying etc... sigh...
in some ways it sounds a bit like the weapons debate. People say the tool is not the problem, people are. I am a good person so I should get to have the tool,which is fine arguement. However, if no one has access to the tool, the ‘bad’ people will be less of a problem because they cant abuse the tool. And maybe the ‘good’ people will find a more ingenious tool? footnote: this is just a thought. I do not wish to open a debate on tools of any sort. only table saw vs circular saw.
That is an interesting point. Downvotes exist in other applications in the #fediverse like #friendica. But #mastodon seems to interpret them as favs, so the original intent of the downvote is suppressed, reversed by mastodon. I am not arguing in favor of implementing downvotes, just want to highlight that it might be in the data but is not presented properly by the service.
@feditips precisely… if they’re fresh from the battleground and it’s all peaceful here in comparison… why is complaining about a quote post the first thing they try? I could not find one thing to demand or complain about at all when I arrived in Nov last year. “Sure is peaceful here, let’s screw it up, PRETTY PLEASE” is not really okay with a lot of us…
@feditips Is there really a high demand for centralization? People don't want to be isolated on their Mastodon instance, sure, but I don't really see anyone saying "make it into one server!"
@feditips I agree. And I'm not yet invested enough in this as a platform to say for certain I'd stay, if they introduced one of the other place's worst features.
@deurman We aren't just individuals, we are all part of a community.
If the community turns toxic, we all suffer.
Features which encourage toxicity harm all of us, because they affect how people around us behave. Toxicity promotes aggression, suspicion and stress, it makes the world a nastier place to live in.
@feditips Honestly, I don't really see how it was used in such a toxic matter. I'm not saying it wasn't, just not my experience. That might also explain why I don't have such a hard stance against it. Then again, I didn't truly experience how toxic Twitter could be for myself up until recently. I never really posted or replied there tho, that might be why too. I just mainly watched some gaming news accounts and YouTubers and such. I never got into politics much there.
@feditips I suspect QTs are worst when someone with a lot of followers/reach is “punching down” on someone without that audience … especially when an algorithm is likely to promote it even more. But either way, there’s no way to auto-ban “negative” QTs. I wonder if the community could organically enforce a standard of etiquette with them? Like with spoilers? If an algorithm isn’t massively juicing the reach, seems like it could be called out & shamed into less of a problem?
@feditips Odd analogy. Decentralization is the main structural aspect of the Fediverse and Mastodon, quote boosting is just a possible feature. And if the latter is abused by bad actors, moderation will be much better than on the other site; if a whole instance is a problem, defederation takes care of it - something impossible on Twitter. Not at all different from like now when users write abusive posts. QB won't make things worse and are good for context.
@feditips You’re making a bad-faith, fallacious argument. Whether centralization would be good or bad has absolutely zero bearing on whether QTs would be good or bad.
I think that most people who ask for it don't understand what #mastodon is about, that quote toots would change one of the most important aspects here: we talk with/to each other, not over/about others.
I hope you don't. Too many people chase clicks instead of actually engaging with people. I like it here as is. People need to stop being lazy about how they interact with people. Social media needs to be more social, less antisocial narcissist. 👍
I have to say it is the only thing I miss about the bird site. I used to use it as a way of positively endorsing something someone was saying and possibly reaching a different audience
I hugely appreciate your willingness to listen and consider users' feedback.
All platforms are evolving on daily basis. Status quo is not set in stone as if some kind of founding fathers' constitutions. Discussion is necessary and beneficial to create a better platform.
For the record, I belong to the camp of "No" to QT and think QT generally a bad idea. However, I also firmly believe the best user experience is always to give users *more control* how to use it.
every single time I want to quote a post, it’s better and kinder if I don’t. I feel less bad about myself as a person when I’m not ripping someone apart on the Internet.
It's a storytelling device. In journalism, it serves a function similar to being able to quote others in the middle of a narrative which the journalist themselves crafts. The journalist being able to contextualize the quote and author the narrative around it, is important.
I personally don't see any problem in just replying/commenting on a post to make it visible to more people.
People need to get used to that #mastodon and #fediverse in general is and should be different to centralized social networks.
In this case, just click on a post with a @mention, a check the original post. It takes only one more step, but it definitely increases communication and engagement.
Initially was disappointed to not have it, but as I used the platform more... Honestly is a gift. Even "good" creators fall victim to creating dogpiles through qrts. Worst one I saw was a trans creator clapping back at someone who misgendered her, and the person apologized and used the right pronouns very quickly after being corrected before the qrt, only to have that person get dogpiled by thousands of well meaning on lookers. This will happen again if we let it.
"One model fits all" approach created some major issues on other social media sites. Considering that features like quote posts have been asked by many, including journalists, having the possibility to opt-out/opt-in will help others to configure Mastodon according to their needs.
honestly, I’m loving Mastodon without quote posts. It is lovely here without the dog-piling, especially as I was a victim at the other place. I feel safer here. If you must do it, consider how to back out. Consider how to record incidents of it being misused.
Why not make a QT/QP a function of a reply? An additional option when you reply to a post to quote the original. Then you get the same “protection” of a reply, but with the ability to include the quote if you want to.
I'm glad to hear this. People who wish to add a comment to a Boost should have access to such a feature. People who would abuse such a feature should not have access to the system at all.
I'd be satisfied with a "boost with added CW" option. Lots of posts out there that I've had to opt out of sharing only because they lacked an important CW.
Who is "we"? That seems to be the core issue with Mastodon, no one is in charge. So how do improvements get into the software? Who decides? I've seen a site for suggestions, but it expects the person suggesting to be an experienced Mastodon developer / tester.
@srevilo I totally agree, also because quoting intentionally breaks conversations. It is very sufficient to see the discussion toots in your feed, from which I can follow the original discussion, if I wanted.
So how about the ability for "commented boosts": you can attach a reply to your boost, so that your timeline afterwards shows your reply, with the boosted post as a "quote".
That way you would still reply inside the thread (ie. talk _to_ the original poster, rather than _about_ them), and you would boost the original post; but your followers would mainly see your comment (and also the boosted post, for context).
Please don't consider it. As you said in 2018, the system as it is encourages interaction. I can boost the toot I reply to if I want to drive further conversation under the original toot. My toot still appears to those who follow me and replies can be added to that. I don't see a problem with this or a need to add something that (in my mind) implies a popularity contest and removes the OP from the discussion. Imagine "quote tooting" against your post instead of all this feedback
disappointed to see you succumb to the twitter masses. It’s only being requested because people are lazy and want what they had. There’s no need for it at all. If rather see work done to reduce the cache overhead on an instance. All those account headers being stored is just madness.
I miss it only because I enjoyed forwarding good stuff to friends with ease. Flip side: It encouraged outrage-storms, and I very much don't miss those. 🤔
I think a lot depends on how they're presented at the front-end. On the bird site, it's easy for the original post to become de-contextualised and negatively framed. Whereas if the original post was shown the same as a regular boost but with the new content as additional context, that may help keep the usage positive
a lot of the demand would be satisfied with better inline link previews for other mastodon posts - ie showing the whole post text rather than the heavily truncated version it currently shows - which encourages people to add screen shots for clarity.
I really do not want to see endless variations of people of one political persuasion, saying that people of a different political persuasion are stupid.
Quote tweets very rarely lead to additional incites, but does lead to timelines being filled with nonsense.
Yes toxic behaviour is generally driven by people not just technology, but people don't want to admit to their own failings. So best not to make it too easy for toxic behaviour.
Maybe just render boosts of replies to include the original toot they're referring to. So a quote toot is essentially nothing but a boosted reply in the original thread that looks like a quote toot in timelines (connection, visibility & „moderatibility“ in original context are thus preserved).
It could be a useful feature I suppose but I would not want it to take priority over necessary bug fixes, moderator’s time, performance gains or security for example.
I would wait and reassess if/when the journalist class decides whether they’re really going to stay on mastodon, or if they’re just sheltering here until the weather at twitter quiets down. Anecdotal data, but I only ever see journalist expats whining about not having it, while the couple that I’ve seen who have really moved in to stay (making new friends, connections outside of other twitter expats, self hosting even) don’t seem to “need” it so badly. #QuotePosting
I am against quote posts, because people have a tendency to QT bad posts merely to add a snarky comment to them and basically say "LOL, look at this idiot!". QT further the spread of bad toots.
My suggestion would be to have a system where an attempt to quote-post results in a notification being sent to the person being quoted who can then choose to approve or deny.
That should do several things: prevents people using quoting instead of replies (because quoting is much slower), and prevent the sort of hostile quotes that are used to call in a mob against someone.
All ‘Quote posts’ on Twitter did was get rid of Modified Tweet - MT? It made things fast and easy!
Quote posts on #Twitter can be supportive or abusive, but the efficiency of it makes it fast. Isn’t this space a more considered, mindful space, speeding things up helps people to be less considerate?
I don't feel as strongly about quote posts as I did in 2018. Personally, I am not a fan, but there is clearly a lot of demand for it. We're considering it.
I’m glad there is deliberation before implementing. Technically it would be easy to quickly build a similar function in several different ways. The complexity is around doing it in an equitable and inclusionary way that doesn’t allow powerful accounts (with many followers) to appropriate control of a conversation from a smaller account who originally generated a thought-provoking discussion.
I look at quote-posts as preview of the post. That's, just how you can preview image and title and part of description of a web page, quote posts could be same to save that additional visit.
please don’t introduce quote posts. On the bird site, quote retweets caused nothing but abuse, dog piling, and less conversation. It’s not a culture mastodon needs.
Could one or two individual instances try it as an experiment? People for whom it is truly important could migrate there. Those of us who miss them, but are learning to appreciate life without them (and without the concomitant pile-ons) could stay put? Just an idea...
May I suggest a retroactive disabling of quoting if you do choose to add this feature? Something that would allow the OP to stop all QTing and related threads and/or remove the original content and hide/remove all the resulting threads? Additionally, it should be extremely clear in QT threads when a quoted toot has been edited...
☹️ look at the vitriol during the quote tweet dunking on Lex Friedman’s book list and Skip Bayless’ NFL game comment just in the past week on Twitter. The two tweets dominated discussion. Tens of millions if not hundreds of millions of outrage views and angry heat posts with little substance.
It is not worth the engagement. It will change the atmosphere and the vibe on here to be far worse.
I am a recent immigrant from the birdsite and a convert to no #QTs, so hope you don’t add them. What’s wrong with simply opening up a Toot reply from someone you follow to see the thread if it appears interesting? Mayba tiny bit more effort, bu it keeps timelines cleaner and less demanding of attention
please don't. Lots of us here hate it; it means some people can hijack our posts, or that they can denigrate what we say, without bothering with a reply, as in "listen to what this idiot is saying". Anyway, if they want to go on and do it, they can still screenshot
I personally like them so you can reply to someone in a more visible way to other people. (Rather than boosting and then replying or screenshotting etc). I DO agree however that there needs to be moderation as they can be misused.
I'd love to see user-moderated QPs. Someone adds to the conversation, great. Someone attacks, one click and the connection is gone, including an approval feature, a "QP request" with the attached text.
I didn’t read the comments, sorry, there are too many. I agree with somehow keeping the emphasis on the originating post. Someone one-upping everyone else’s posts and getting all the attention will be community destroying, your producers will stop producing.
The only use I saw for it when I poked around on Truth Social for a few days (wanted to see what they did to Mastodon) was for trolling. I really didn't see an actual reason for it. I would think it's going to be a headache when editable posts are thrown into the mix.
Seems like we've been doing just fine without quoted posts 🤷♂️
the fear of many to post quoting is not without some foundation, as it can (and has been) grossly misused by internet trolls. But in my case it helped me elaborate on the quoted post or add a remark to it — I’d happily use it but I can also see why many others don’t want to.
@atanas I am less of a fan. I think it encourages echo-chamber engagement. A little work (and copy/paste is very little work) to quote someone isn’t a lot to ask.
I don't feel strongly either way. But I DO feel strongly that changing ones mind (and listening to others) is a very good trait in humans. Especially in leaders - which you are, in a way.
I agree that it should be opt-out and implemented thoughtfully.
Well, you have tools for those who don't like them or for when they are abusive: we can block the abuser; we can block anyone from quoting us. Being able to quote a post with a comment to introduce your reason for doing so is a tool I like, and I personally don't use it to attack anyone. I don't quote posts that offend me.
after reading some of these replies.. I don’t feel like theres anything wrong with quoting a post. It’s just a repost with a comment. All in one place.
You can’t really get context for someone reposting a picture or video unless you go to their profile and see if they added a follow up post like “as per my last post”.
It did get a bed rep from Twitter, but I think this feature in the hands of mastodon users would be beneficial to engaging and understanding people.
I think if QPs are introduced, it will boil down to whether they are enabled or disabled by default, as that's what most users will have. If off by default, the feature might as well not exist; if on by default, then using it will become the paradigm and users might occasionally have to circumvent the original poster's preference by linking to the post or taking a screenshot. So I think making it optional might clutter the interface for little benefit. I might be entirely wrong, though.
« there is clearly a lot of demand for it » : do you have stats, or articles with stats, about this ? I am curious of the tools and of the protocol used to assert this. Thanks in advance
IMO, the more critical part than the preview is being able to have a link (to a toot on another server) be shown on my own server, so that I can follow its author, reply, etc.
My heart sank when I read that. My observation is that QT’s are significantly used for negative rather than positive reasons. This feels like a huge moment for the future of Mastodon.
I'm not 100% against quote posts, but if implemented tactlessly they're a one-way ticket to toxicity. Let's try to avoid implementing a "dunk mechanism".
That would be great. Quoting was one of thefeatures I really missed after moving from Twitter. It gives me the possibility to not only spreading the word of others, but commenting it at the same time and giving my opinion about it. @apps
I think an essential component of this would be, if the OP blocks the person quote-tweeting them, their post could be immediately made private to the quoter only. (Or deleted altogether, but I think making it private would work.) There needs to be some control available for the quotee. Allowing opt-outs is good but people will want flexibility after posting too.
If it’s possible to build in revokable and customizable consent-to-be-quoted and the ability for readers to turn off quote posts (as we already can regular boosts) I think the downsides could be mitigated.
a humble opinion from a new user: if I visit a country or start a new job, I work within their confines (e.g., learn their policies or their language). I don't demand that everyone speak my language or change the rules to the ones I think are good for me. If you think quote tweets aren't within your original vision, then people should just understand this. They can join or not join. Please don't make this into the new Twitter. People are here because this community is different.
I think that some of the pushback is from people who think quote replies makes #mastodon "into (the worst version of) twitter" but there's no reason that will be true.
As a feature it us useful for providing context to a boost, without obscuring it.
It also could be a client side implementation with a show parent button for any reply
There's got to be a happy medium where the feature is there for users and admins that want it and a way to filter out or disable that content for those that don't.
I despise quote posts, so I’m definitely not part of the demand. Not looking forward to seeing them be used like on the #hellbirdsite. All they’re good for is hate and dogpiling. I hope there’s a way to opt out. I freaking hate them.
Hoffe sehr, dass die zitierten Beiträge nicht kommen.
Die Argumente, die dagegen sprechen, sind ja weithin bekannt (z.B. Förderung toxischer Umgangston, "Übereinander reden") und ich würde allen, die unbedingt sowas brauchen, dringend Dienste wie Friendica empfehlen, die diese Funktion bereits haben.
@ueckueck Auch wenn ich es selbst kritisch sehe und nicht weiß, wie sich die negativen Aspekte ausgemerzen lassen, aber vielleicht schafft es das Entwicklungsteam Mastodons um @Gargron ja eine Möglichkeit zu schaffen, die die negativen Aspekte bei der Implementierung aktiv berücksichtigt.
Vielleicht wäre die eine "Opt-In Funktion per User" etwas - also dass User einer Zitierung von eigenen Beiträgen aktiv zustimmen muss?
@ueckueck Ich würde die Frage aus Interesse mal an #FediAdmin #FediverseModerationsTreff #FediModeration weitergeben wollen: Könnte eine "Opt-In per User mit Genehmigungsprozess"-Funktion eine Option für Zitierbare Beiträge sein?
@w4ts0n @ueckueck @M @kirschwipfel @barning @fries @ebinger @wir @milan @Cedara Ich wuerde beim Kurs bleiben, keinen Quote Tweet zu implementieren. Wer auf einen Post verweisen will, ohne direkt im Thread zu antworten, kann dies ja bereits heute mit z.B. Friendica oder per kopierten Link tun. Wer zu faul ist, den Link zu kopieren, ist halt zu faul, den Link zu kopieren.
Quote Toots sind keine Diskussionen mit den Leuten, sondern Gespraeche ueber die Leute. Opt-In ist IMHO zu viel Aufwand
Aber mein Hauptproblem ist ja, dass wenn es eine kritische Masse nutzt, sich die allgemeine Kultur ändert. Hin zum "übereinander reden".
Spannend ist z.B., dass ein lieber Bekannter und ich gestern getestet haben, ob ich auf Mastodon benachrichtigt werde, wenn er auf Friendica und auf Misskey Beiträge von mit zitiert. Aber da wird nix angezeigt. Mastodon hat das einfach nicht implementiert.
Wir sind also aktuell nicht nur in der Situation, dass sich Menschen nicht wehren können, dass sie so zitiert werden, sie bekommen es als Masto-Nutzer•innen nicht mal mit. So wie es jetzt ist, ist also auch Mist.
It's definitely not trivial. My observation on Twitter is that the worst part of quote tweeting is how locked accounts can do it. It makes it impossible for people to identify and block the sources of coordinated harassment.
All design decisions are compromises, and yes there are valid arguments in favour of a QT feature. The arguments against QTs have the benefit of being backed by the reality of Mastodon's discussion culture, which we want to preserve and which was shaped by ruling out QTs.
9 out of 10 of those loudly demanding QTs have never asked how they might benefit from not using them. Their very loudness is the strongest argument against QTs.
I use them to say things like 'look at this brilliant post', or 'check out the hilarious comment thread on this post'. Never thought of them as an abuse tool.
a 'show context in feed' checkbox option on replies might work? So that when I reply to a message, people can see the replied toot in their feeds, which they can override on a per user basis. I would go for opt out, because opt in might make for awkward reading if writers assume people will have context.
For me, it's way to respond to a post in a way that doesn't hijack a conversation. Often times, my replies aren't directly relevant to the primary conversation – mostly a matter for tangential discussion.
I definitely think there's ways it can be done well. I used them a lot on Twitter to "yes and" threads I supported.
Yes, others sometimes used them to brigade, which is bad. But there are also ample good uses. Designing it in a way to maximize the good uses and minimize the bad ones is a challenge, I agree, but a worthwhile one.
in scrolling through the replies here, it looks like it’s a culture battle btw people who have enjoyed the silo’d & quieter aspect here (along with being really techy) vs the new people who are missing a wider conversation & who have been part of big cultural movements & need/want to continue that here. Almost like introverts vs extroverts. I would say, then, that the personal and societal arguments on both sides are valid. Offering options for both is the solution, along with the UX.
frankly, feeling strongly about it was one of your best decisions, so i'm not sure why you'd want to ruin that as well. there is a lot of demand for it simply because it is a feature people miss from twitter. people who have not had the feature for years don't miss it.
@ppatel We already have boosts you can't turn off with 3rd party apps. Maybe add the ability to filter them with the API like you can on the web interface please?
Just adding a voice to the “I’d really rather we didn’t” category. The experience of browsing mastodon vs ye olde Twitter is night and day in regards to original content.
I think it’s inevitable that QT functionality empowers folks to have endless “takes” on the same posts. Even taking the harassment angle out of it (which is quite seriously imho) it’s not good for post quality.
I’d rather copy, paste and label it myself. Like this: QT. ***I don't feel as strongly about quote posts as I did in 2018. Personally, I am not a fan, but there is clearly a lot of demand for it. We're considering it.***
I used the old AOL boards and we had convos that lasted for days at times. We all Quoted one another to keep the conversation going. People need a way to quote one another, but a complete Quote Toot is not worth the harassment it will bring.
@eichkat3r @john Correct: it becomes immensely complex. What do the #moderators have to say about it? They have the best overview of the work they already have without such a feature. And they would certainly get even more work if something like this were introduced. Most of them do it on a voluntary basis and on a donation basis. I think they are being asked to do too much.
I think I would be okay with it as long as it is something an individual account can opt out of. a way in settings to opt out of it automatically on all posts and setting on each post that you can opt in and out of or set to only people you follow can quote tweet.
Some of the worst parts of quote replies could be mitigated by including them in the list of responses, the same as any other reply. That would make them less prone to branching the responses.
my single vote against quote posts. This clutters a timeline and encourages a lot of jumping on a specific topic which causes artificial amplification. Journalists, influencers, and people looking for quick fun miss it, yet QTs do not encourage a deep dive. Interaction with topic happens by responding to the poster. Bring in others by boosting. People like QT because they want to be seen quoting a specific post. Let them build their reputation on their own posts.
Since joining Mastodon a couple of months ago, my opinion on quote posts has changed. I'm leaning more towards not having them. I feel that, for a very small percentage of posts, I do want to add something when boosting, but otherwise I'm fine not being able to quote post.
I don't feel as strongly about quote posts as I did in 2018. Personally, I am not a fan, but there is clearly a lot of demand for it. We're considering it. That horse seems to have left the barn, so it would be nice if we could skip the cut and paste step.
please hold the line on no quote posts. I strongly believe the lack of quote posts is one of the reasons Mastodon is so much more pleasant and less toxic than other services. theatlantic.com/magazine/archi…
From whom though? Folks who have been here a long time and are intentionally working against make this Twitter 2.0? Or those that swarmed here under the promise that's what Mastodon was? I've only ever seen the demand lately and from the latter. When I've seen quote posts in the wild on the Fediverse, it has always taken the form of harassment.
Not only do we have the chance to break from the past and do better, but this decision affects the rest of the Fediverse, too.
Do it. Yes, it can be used in a nasty and toxic way like @aral says. But they also can be pretty useful. Shouldn’t you be allowed to say something about the stuff you’re reposting?
Should you decide to include such a #feature in a future version of #Mastdon, I’d like to suggest a companion feature to release at the same time: The ability to block #quote toots / quote posts.
Thank you for all your hard work and for your consideration.
As a recent joiner from Twitter, who used this feature frequently, I vote against.
Most of the time I didn't misuse it. But a few times I did.
You can accomplish the same manually. The tiny additional effort gives enough pause to rethink whether referring to someone's content rather than directly engaging is the best option.
I like that they don't have them here. Over on the bird site, they are used for nothing but starting trouble. There's no good reason in my mind, given how much problem people use them to start trouble, to not just boost and then reply to the boost. It does the same thing, but without the ability to start trouble. My two cents.
It seems to me the simple solution would be giving the original poster the control over whether or not a post can be quote-boosted. Just a simple toggle when creating the post should be sufficient.
We non-journalists all had to learn new things and adapt our existing social media behaviors to successfully use Mastodon. Journalists have been given far too many “Easy buttons” that they haven’t earned over the past several years. They can learn and adapt to use Mastodon too. There’s currently only one major squeaky wheel here right now, and she’s done nothing but complain since she got here, please don’t bend to her celebrity-like demands.
there is an entire toxic culture of lazily dunking on other people's posts via trite quote tweets on Twitter that I had to unfollow multiple respected people to get away from. Regardless of what anyone here says, large accounts doing it also leads to pile-ons. It also went meta, with people posting outrageous things specifically to trick people into amplifying them via trite dunks. These things do not currently exist here, but absent a clever implementation, they absolutely will appear.
Honestly, I just want to do what they do on tumblr where if someone posts a picture without alt text, someone else can do the reply with the alt text and it shows up underneath. There are so many things I don't retoot because they don't have alt tags.
Not having quote posts was jarring to me for a bit, but now I've adapted to it and actually really prefer it this way. If it's coming, could it at least be on an instance-by-instance basis?
as a refugee from the other place, I’m strongly against it. I think it’s one of the things that lead to such negativity over there. People would constantly use it to lash poorly thought out criticisms. Boosts are boosts: simple positive. Why on earth boost something you hate? If people have a problem with the OP, why not debate with them directly via a thread of responses?
In my short time on Mastodon vs twitter, NOT having quote posts has led to more direct interactions with the OP, and less knee-jerk reactions to posts.
Maybe quote posts could be a *type of reply*? A button that says “include original post”? Might be some benefits to that as well, i.e. in a reply to a megathread, you could quote a specific status. Or even another reply. All while in the original context.
I love it! And I think if it's possible to make it an opt-in feature per post, that would be ideal. Think of it like #Tiktok and how you can allow stitches, duets, per each of your video posts. If we could choose to allow #qt, it would likely appease most users, as those that don't want it would simply never turn it on for their posts
It's a standard cost/benefit analysis Popularity aside as witnessed of American society that endorsed much of the hellscape we're all NOW eyebrow deep in
With quote posts I can provide image descriptions that the original poster did not. I can say *why* I'm boosting something. I get the reasoning behind not having it here, but I also see advantages.
One of my favorite aspects of moving to Mastodon is that this is *not* a feature. Please don't reinvent this particular mistake, it will absolutely change behavior for the worse.
Actually, I think the premisse of the argument against it is not correct. Sure, quote posts have been misused for bad behaviour. But that does not neccesarily mean that quote posts are inherently bad.
When I look at my current twitter timeline, most quote tweets I see are not used to attack persons. Mostly, they are used to give something context, to give some extra information, or to explain why it would be interesting. There are some personal attacks, but not much ...
I think a way to opt-out of quote posts would be solid. If folks want to avoid the "dunk culture" quote posting can result in, they could be free to do it.
Thanks for listening, regardless of your decision. My two cents: it's useful for a lot of people. I do miss it. I think it can be implemented better here.
I would guess most who want that function have come from Twitter. Over there quote tweets are a huge part of that site's negativity. Also, it's a lot easier to grab someone else's content and repost it than coming up with one's own good content. By not having quote posts here, I would argue, has elevated the content and engagement here over what we see on Twitter.
I don't want them but if you do implement, please make sure they can be disabled per-instance, blocked per user, and that filters apply both to the post and the rt'd content.
I’ve used them before without having to resort to abuse! It seems a valid way to add to content but it would be nicer if the quote-toot is together with comments, since it is just another form of comment.
Didn't get a lot of feedback on it, but to me, it might seem a reasonable compromise of being able to showcase one's contextualization (the usual "good" QP use case) and not ripping a discussion away from the original thread, as is often indicated to be a bad feature in this context.
Very much open to discussion on this, though, because I likely overlooked something major.
Happy New Year! First of all, thank you very much for the great platform, which I have enjoyed a lot since moving from the bird site a couple of months ago. But if the quote-posts are introduced here, I am afraid it will change the culture to Twitter-like and may destroy the main arguments of why I have moved to here in the first place
What about a "captioned boost" where the boosters content is below the original? Might discourage the more "look at me and how much better I am than this person" style of quote post while letting people add context to why they are boosting?
I personally feel this would be a net negative experience, but it's not a hill I would die on. If we do add it, can we have a button to see all the people who quote tooted a specific toot? Was annoying how twitter didn't make that easy.
it adds an extra social dynamic, I can quote repost a journalist or publication’s post linking to their article rather than just a URL that leads elsewhere
normally, I'd want to quote this and express to my followers that I'm happy it's being reconsidered and hope that people's concerns about the feature can also be addressed somehow.
Quote posts are basically the same thing as outside links, except that the link is to elsewhere in the Fediverse. Sometimes it isn't obvious why you've boosted/linked to it, and you want to explain. There are lots of uses for the basic function besides being mean to people. I suspect it was the algorithms that caused the problems, not the function itself.
In that case, bear in mind that voices for change are usually louder and more vociferous than voices that support the status quo. People from the UK will know what I mean.
I thought I was an advocate for QTs when I first started using Mastodon properly. I've come to realise that their downsides outweigh the upsides. Maybe consider that a supermajority should be required to support any decision to change.
Quote posts aren't always about snarky attacks, they often are used to piggyback someone's point or to add another perspective in context with the post that is being quoted. Or simply a reaction. I don't mind the occasional snark now and then either if I'm being totally honest 😁 Greta's clapback on Andrew Tate for instance lol.
I'm glad. I think that, without an algorithmic timeline, the use of quote posts would be significantly less likely to be weaponized. The ability to opt-out would be prudent. I continue to wonder if there isn't something in the UX design that could add a little friction to the process to encourage more thoughtful, intentional use...but I'm not a UX person, so not sure what that might be, if there is.
> I don’t feel as strongly about quote posts as I did in 2018.
tbf, your harassment inpipe may have peaked; some of the little ppl still just want a place that isn’t being lit on fire every five minutes as opposed to every ten
just saying, Eugen. there’s a lot of ppl willing to tell you whatever just to make money
What about allowing a quote post, but only as a response to the original post. That is, the original post first and indicating if it is itself an original toot or a response, and then the quotor’s comment underneath. It would still appear in the original posts regular flow, but appear with the instigating post in the general timeline.
I think your original 2018 intuition was good and that it would be better not to do it: on Twitter it is mostly only used for insulting, ridiculing or as an egocentric substitute for the Reply option. I just hope that if finally implemented, the opt out will allow us to prevent our toots from being quoted.
consider it quickly please so I can know whether to start looking for another social network as soon as possible. I didn’t come here to be on Twitter again.
Is there a way to add the feature and through implementation make it useful for those that wish to use it without negative effects that would not otherwise be on Mastodon? Anybody can take a screenshot of a post and attach it to a message if they wanted to, it's just cumbersome for those who want to to do so. #MastodonUpdate #QuoteTweet
In my opinion, qrt is pure laziness. And has the enormous probability of becoming extremely toxic, rapidly. I am, and always will be, for creating original content, not leeching on others' for fame. IMO, the main reason for qrt is that people come from twitter, are used to it and cannot handle change, but Mastodon must pave its own way. Next? Algo? Instagram put "stories" copying tiktok, and now is an endless shitstorm of videos, far from the elegant photo posting it once was.
This environment is different then musketwitter and I like that. QT is not a feature I cared about there really. And frankly made stuff feel disconnected when I think about it.
as a user who has previously voiced support for quoting, I feel almost obligated to request that it /not/ be implemented. It's one of those little "not here" things that I think has made using Mastodon that much kinder on my brain.
...that said, it would improve my "credit to user XYZ who found this" workflow immensely, which makes up like 90% of my threads on Bird Hell. Dunno if I'd be doing the same here - I've mostly been keeping myself "focused" on rambling
Until I saw @Gargron's justification for Mastodon banning quote posts I didn't see a problem. I decided, on balance, this decision was correct and was surprised many insisted it impaired journalists' incentive to come here. Like many things quote posting can be used for good or bad. Opting out is a poor idea as you'd miss those using it for balanced debate. The alternative is using copy and paste to provide context. But that risks people saying they've been taken out of context. #QuotePosts
Several times Neil Gaiman quote posted me on the other place and I invariably retweeted it even when he was being critical of me and I felt the need to defend myself from his criticism. My stats went off the scale when this happened but that wasn't the reason I was happy. It helped everybody that both sides of an argument were available to everyone. Opting out of quote posting seems an unwise thing to do. If someone thinks they've been treated unfairly they can block. #QuotePosts
imo something more akin to backlinks help.obsidian.md/How+to/Workin… would be more powerful. - they allow posts to reference more than 1 post, not just one. - backlinks that haven’t been approved by the orig author or from blocked users don’t show up in a post - unlike “quote posts” they don’t require users to learn a new concept for the compose UI, they just paste links to other posts as they normally would do when they want to reference them.
Please DON'T. The absence of tre quote feature was one essential factor differentiating Mastodon from Twitter and discouraging aggressive and abusive behaviors while giving space to engagement and exchange. Whoever wants to agree or disagree with a statement, post, point of view can do it, there are ways for that. No need to go backwards and use a feature that has no positive record on Twitter, in my humble opinion. Thanks.
Just because there is a lot of demand doesn't mean that it should be implemented. Quoting a user's post means that the quoting user doesn't reply to the original subject and context but instead is promoting his/her opinion/comment by *using* the original one. Therefore such a move will result to a passive aggressive-by-design medium (at best) when the actual objective is to create content and respond productively. Also this behavior is generally unacceptable IRL, why having it here?
Over the short period of time that I am actively using Mastodon, it has become so much more Twitter-like, including all the negative parts, and QT’s are a essential ingredient to the 🐦 site’s un-culture. So far, Mastodon is faring quite well in dampening the Twitter effect, but there is certainly a breaking point — and that might very well come with QT’s.
they aren't any different to replies and can be reported all the same. 🤷♂️
I'd like to not see ones of people I blocked.. Like at all. Twitter shows me what the QTer posts.. I don't even want that of I have the original poster blocked. 👍
Also wenn, dann ergibt nur pro Toot für mich Sinn. Und das halt auch nur dann, wenn ich das nicht generell machen kann, sondern bei jedem User erneut gefragt werde. Schliesslich kann ich es ja durchaus begrüßen, wenn User A das macht, aber mißbilligen, wenn User B das machen will.
So, und dann bau mal ein System, was das zuverlässig hinbekommt und das über Software-Grenzen hinweg. ;)
Twitter #QTs work more as a kind of "alt-reply" function, more "branching off a conversation" than simply linking to a post, with 3 essential attributes:
1. The other post is displayed as if it's a seamless part of ones own 2. The other person is notified just as with a reply or @-mention 3. QTs are listed under "x Quoted Posts" under the original post
When one says "I want QTs", is this what one means? Would anything less be enough?
I'd rather see a native toot translating capability than the quote boost, TBH. On the desktop is not as bad since it's easier to open new window, but on an Android mobile it's quite difficult.
I‘m part of the recent Twitter migration and first I was confused, that the quotation feature was „missing“. But in my opinion, that we don’t have that function here, is a huge contribution to keep toxic conversations down. You just can’t p**p out a witty and sharp comment as easy. So I‘m in favor not to implement this sort of obvious feature.
I am ambivalent on quote posts, but I quite like how you handled post editing in a way that eliminates most of the concerns raised on it. A similar approach of listening to the concerns and building with them in mind would make it feasible to not be a destructive feature.
@ij @M @w4ts0n @ueckueck @kirschwipfel @barning @fries @ebinger @wir @milan @Cedara Find ich viel zu kompliziert. Würde für den gewünschten Effekt (keine herablassen Drükos) doch völlig reichen, wenn die kommentierte Person über einen Drüko informiert wird und rückwirkend unterbinden (oder meinetwegen moderieren) kann. Das allein würde die Rate an herablassenden Drükos gen Null senden, weil man schon beim Erstellen eines Drükos weiß, dass die kommentierte Seite die Macht hat, ihn jederzeit und unkommentiert vollständig zu löschen. Immer das mildeste Mittel (in dem Fall: den geringsten Eingriff ins die Kommunikation) wählen. So wird das soziale Problem auch sozial gelöst.
I'd like it if a QT would automatically pull the OP's handle in. Kind of the same as when you respond except your comment shows up at the top, I guess.
I somewhat oppose posts that quote all of one post like Twitter. If it is a partial citation of a post or web article, that is, a correct citation, I may agree.
p.s. I hope you relaunch the profile category implementation. There are more people here than before.
I think if quote posts were just handled a different way than on twitter they could be cool tbh… like some others have said it’s nice to be able to add commentary to something you share and it’s not inherently malicious (tho I do understand it can be used for such)
Opt out is the wrong way to go about it - make it opt IN, so you have to concuously make the decision to allow your Toots to be quotable. I would also suggest that the ability to use QTs is liked to this - you can only QT other people if yours are also quotable. (I know of more than a few people who would abuse this while turning it off for themselves.)
I hope you do allow them. I like to comment on stories as I pass them along. I hesitate to bring things I didn't post myself to people's attention without explaining why.
I feel that there is a need for a better means to post comments on web articles. And that too as a post on the person's own account. As in the past, I think the Mastodon way is to use the reply function for comments on another account. So when boosting a post, it might be nice to be able to choose whether to pull only the article URL, reply to that post comment, or simply repost (share) them. It would also be interesting to have the ability to list the comments posted to web articles.
I joined the fediverse some months ago and really enjoy that people talk with each other and not about other people, which I think will start with commented boosts.
I think it is a good thing that discussions related to a toot are only possible in one direction and avoid fuzzyfication of discussion.
It avoids that accounts with high numbers of followers take over the work/ideas of others and start a new discussion in their bubble.
I like them. Partly I like, sometimes, to quote my own posts - when a new thought occurs. Partly, I like to add thoughts to the posts of others. For me, it's more a case of 'yes... and', rather than any wish to belittle or contradict.
I like them, because I like to agree and expand upon someone’s post. If I read theirs and then make my own based on theirs it’s like I’m stealing their ideas and that makes me uncomfortable.
Hendrik Mans 🚀
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •alice
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •oshy
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Toot Terrorist
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Moellus
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Alex Coventry
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Rick de Haan
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Christian Mutig 👻🚫
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Matt :opensuse: :wayland:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Jan ☕🎼🎹☁️🏋️♂️
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Mx Dysphoric
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Tina
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Mostafa Hussein Omar
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •please consider the idea of giving consent to be quote tweeted.
Thanks for all the hard work and happy new year.
Darnell Clayton :verified:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •If you do add it, you should make it so people can opt to have their posts “quote posted.” If the setting is on, people can do it. If not, then they can only boost.
You can even have it apply per post settings as well. Just a few suggestions.
Alaric
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •RealSolo
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •the ones demanding it are all from twitter.
Quote post isn't engaging, its used in an inflammatory way in most cases.
Those that want it should learn how to engage with the posters, not quote post.
In my opinion, I would not want to see the environment be altered here due to twitter migrants who want what they had there. But hey thats just my opinion.
Mette
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •dada
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •scott f
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •A quote toot is just a link
scott.mnEugen Rochko
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •reshared this
Glyn Moody, Sozialwelten and Iris Volk reshared this.
Sean
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •myownpetard blue checkmark
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Jessica Lam 👩🏻💻👩🏻🎨
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •i think people are just used to having what they are used to, maybe invent something new that achieve similar goals without the drawbacks?
I’d rather not have it
Reasoning here: mastodon.social/@kangaroo5383/…
Akhenatobi & Meritaten etc.
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •I personally don’t use them for sport, or direct my approach or message through them or that way… that’s just me…
It may feel a little “busier” on the feed, but if there is a way we can opt out of seeing them/having the feature… then I’m that person.
Andy Lundell 🙄
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Sean Macツ
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •BeeDazzledCymru
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Stephen Cox Author
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •DJGummikuh
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Also kudos, I personally like (and miss!) Quotes and respect that you are revisiting your position! 👍
Eric de Redelijkheid :fedi:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Henry Schroy 🇧🇷
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Ynte
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •I think this "quote toot" option, whatever it is, should be OPT-IN rather than opt-out. It should not be on by default.
I still think it isn't needed. You can link to any toot via URL anyway.
empunkt
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Chaoddity
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Would it be an account-wide setting that could be changed on a per-post basis as well?
Mike Stone
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Parigot-Manchot φ
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Pourquoi pas...
Nicholas-ITSulu
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Providing an opt out option is a great idea. It is an important feature to give the original post more power. It will also reduce negative use of the #QT.
Yet ANOTHER feature #Mastodon has over #Twitter_Exit
joggle
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Steven Rogge
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Andy Lundell 🙄
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Overt harassment is one of the reasons quote-tweets are harmful.
Opt-out could solve this, but ONLY if it's retro-active, and deletes already existing quote-toots.
The other, far more common, way the feature is harmful to Twitter is that it encourages people to believe that amplifying harmful voices is the correct and proper way to respond to them. But in practice, Twitter has shown that amplifying harmful voices, even to criticize them with a brilliant bon mot, normalizes the harmful voices and helps them gain acceptance.
I don't think that opt-out solves that problem, because the most harmful voices are the ones most eager for any kind of attention, so of course they'll opt in.
Kristin (vis.social Admin)
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •it's not trivial at all! Doing it safely, will take a lot of people hours to actually moderate, and software support for actually doing that moderation... and more!
The reasons for not having them are valid. So are the reasons for having them.
I would strongly suggest seeking guidance from folks like @timnitGebru and others she recommends.
We can make a difference and build software that supports human efforts to do better. We just need to listen, and listen again.
🇺🇦 Lauteshirn 🏳️🌈
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •I don't know how I feel about that.
We don't want to become like Twitter. Or do we?
Owl
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Mikhail Kats
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Harry Ballzak ✅
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •ArtBrew
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •fasol
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Henriette Pilkes 🌻🍀🦋 reshared this.
@UdoBlick
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Amy (she/her)
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Wiredfire :BA:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •藤井太洋, Taiyo Fujii
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •great!
I hope those.
- opt-out per posts and default setting
- option not to get mention by quotes and default setting
- option not to fetch quotes by following and default setting
Lukas
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Winston Smith
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Thank you so much. I came into your replies to ask for an opt-out, and you've already considered it.
You have my thanks, and I complement you on being a thoughtful (and apparently good) developer
Elizabeth Tai | 戴秀铃 🇲🇾
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Vint Prox
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Hell, it may have been as trivial as to make quoted posts appear above the booster. But I'm not sure myself. Good to have you on board with changes!
Sorry to see people bashing your old toot. Apparently, they are yet to learn that opinions are not immutable.
Don't Sweat the Technique ✊
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Dave nλ=2dsinθ :protein:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •can it be made into a fifth level of visibility, a bit like:
Quotable
Public
Unlisted
Followers-only
Direct
That way, If I want to allow something to be quoted far and wide, I can set it accordingly.
phillip
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Calamity Caitlin
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •hayden aiken 🇺🇲🤝🇺🇦
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •I sympathize with the argument I've seen that it feels like the added portion to the quoted post adds very little, usually. But I think that it's no less trivial than any given random user's sparsely viewed posts anyway, and alas, I and clearly many others are still trying to find a way to share posts and our replies to them in an intuitive way.
One way I've seen is someone replying to a post and boosting their reply. On birdsite, replies and QTs were super separate threads, but maybe on Mastodon they could be implemented as a type of reply that simultaneously boosts (at least from a UI design perspective) both posts together? What I mean is a reply that shows in my followers feeds and displays the replied-to post above it, thread style. Perhaps this could also help with the issue of implementing permissions controlled by the original poster.
karen
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Décimo Belenista
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Raccoon at TechHub :mastodon:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •wagz
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •drikkes
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Egli
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •aminco
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •How the Internet Ruined Our Passion for Politics -- And How We Can Get It Back
Rohitha Naraharisetty (The Swaddle)Idealistic Pragmatist :mstdn:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Jon
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •David Adler
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Saw a somewhat charming approach some days ago. Instead of embedding the other post, the original post was shown prior in the feed, and the „quoting post“ as a response. This way it is possible to refere to another post in a direct way, but the initial post is still prioritized. This could be a good compromise from my view.
In this case this was a solution on the App side, which just worked when reply and boost were in the same timeframe.
Nitbuntu ✅
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •I can guarantee that those complaining there isn’t a QT feature will not be happy if they’re not able to QT because that person had opted out.
But 100% agree that we should be able to opt out. I expect most people will be switching it off.
unlofl [Promoted Toot]
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Thanks for looking at this, I'd like to have it, but also agree with concerns about it being a vector for dog-piling.
Its a complicated one, we can link toots now, but quoting definitely changes all the human behavior around it.
Maybe also let instances enable/disable posting quote toots, and enable/disable if the quote is shown or just a link?
Jodieohdoh
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Hannah 🐝
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Tarmo Tanilsoo
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Caleb Faruki
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •QTs strip context. If we do QTs, they should probably note whether quote is part of thread or discussion.
The goal should be to show the right amount of info to emphasize that the reader should look further and not simply take the most immediately quoted toot at face value.
zunda
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •mumu
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Jane Manchun Wong :janewong:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Octavia con Amore
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Leonardo Di Ottio
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •How about this for QuoteToots?
By default only posts with hashtags can be quoted (after all, they are intended to be fairly public).
Accounts can change to AlwaysAllow if they are, for instance, a news or campaign organisation or just want their Mastodon experience to be more public.
Accounts can change to AlwaysBlock if they are concerned about abuse or wish their Mastodon experience to be more intimate.
#QuoteTweet #QuoteToot #QuotePost #Mastodon
Jay Sim
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Nithish
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Carlo Gubitosa :nonviolenza:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Unthanc
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •QTs weren't something that I thought about until coming here and reading your and others thoughts on the negative points about them. Which convinced me to be opposed to them.
So if you so add the feature I'd prefer an opt-in rather than opt-out.
I'm not sure opt-in would work though because I guess people wouldn't opt-in in enough numbers to make it useful for those that do want it.
Bradley :smugcat:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Luc
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Lamont Sky
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •> If we did do it we'd like to make it
> something you can opt out of, in a
> similar way to how we plan to allow
> disabling replies.
I think, I would be annoyed by not being able to respond. Could we have a filter for this kind of toots?
Spookybot :cursed_verified:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Stefan Scholl
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •disabled replies is one of the more frustrating features of Twitter.
On Mastodon, you can already only ask the people who are following you. Disabling replies leads to public posts with questions you can’t answer.
ЯØ81И
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •sagebiel
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Jorges
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Why not simply expand the preview of a link to a toot so that it also shows the text within Mastodon?
Like for this one. It should not only show your name and photo but also the toot text:
mastodon.social/@Gargron/10962…
Eugen Rochko
2023-01-03 06:37:13
A Slightly Orange Cat
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Perhaps you can have an opt-in system that allows quote boosting if the quoted writer allows it. The settings could be:
Allow quote boosts...
* Always
* Never
* With my approval
MolecularXtal
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Volpit :ac_thought:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Ronan
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •It seems to me those looking for this are new here (as I am). They are just the loudest voices, as no one shouts much to retain a status quo. It's not needed, if they want they can put the direct link to a toot in their text.
It will be used to dunk on users. Of that there's no doubt
Bob Wyman
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •'s plan to modify Mastodon to disable replies strikes me as profoundly misguided and likely to make fighting disinformation and lies more difficult.
No one who makes a public statement should have either the right or means to constrain replies -- whether positive or negative. If it is within one's right to speak, it is certainly within another's right to respond.
GJ Groothedde 🇪🇺
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Coreyartus
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •katzenberger
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •There is clearly also a lot of demand to *not* implement something like that.
#QuotePosts
arpia49
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Pie
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Andreas F.
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Matteo Ceriotti
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Aday
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •smtddr.bsky.social
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Sye
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Bearded_Pip
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Nordnick :verified:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •stux⚡
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •But please.. please.. not like Twitter does.
It seems so bad that if other people take the content of the original poster and gets more reach with that without some 'credit' or something..
On Twitter it was always the 'famous' people who ripped the tweets of others and got popular with it.. That seems so wrong
Cora
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Andrei Kucharavy
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •EddiKat
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Honestly, I'd be more for quote posts than turning off replies. Turning off replies is how people put disinformation out while limiting the ability of others to comment. I think its one of the more problematic things the bird site ever did.
I see corporations and hateful people limiting replies far more often than I see it from any other group.
Mullana
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •It's sad that quoting on Twitter was often used in a bad way, but sometimes I just want to post a "Hey, look at this artist!" with a bit more context for my bubble. It works without quoting but it feels like when you're in a conversation and can't pull out your phone to quickly show people what you're actually talking about.
Gay Fluffball :verified_gay:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •SomersetWhovian 🇺🇦💙
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •I don't have strong feelings either way. I tended to use it on Twitter in a positive way: perhaps to support an opinion, or often to boost a new initiative or book, giving my opinion on why it's worthwhile. However, I have seen too many pile-ons started by QTs, and I quite understand why many people here are against them.
So if it is introduced, I think the default should be opt-in. Make it as easy as possible for people to have a good experience.
Thanks for listening.
Puffer
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •David Brookes 🔶🎸
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •undívaga
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Users will always be cited by people at other instances by copying and pasting the post URL. But if I am not warned about it, I cannot check if the quote is a loyal comment or plain defamation.
Dr. Jorge Caballero
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •As a first-pass, the privacy setting of the post should be sufficient: if the post is public (i.e not unlisted, not followers-only), then it's fair game for QPs. If, for whatever reason, the original author wants to limit access after-the-fact, then changing the privacy setting for the post from public -> unlisted would achieve the desired effect
From an implementation standpoint, QPs could be implemented as a fully-rendered embed of the output from the /embed API endpoint
Padraig Fahy 🌈
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •But in true 2022/2023 fashion... Make it a poll that only Patreon members can vote on.
(This is a joke btw, please do not draw your pitchforks 🙏 )
Alejandro Gaita Ariño :ecoanarchism_heart:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Adam Crain
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Not sure how that would help, you can still quote post with a screenshot and that doesn't address if someone retracts or edits a post. I'd rather have that chance to fix or clarify a post the someone quotes then just blocking it.
What's the logic in blocking quote posts?
Andrew Hinton
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •G
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Anne Williams 🏳️🌈✊☮️
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Cassandrich
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Oliver Kamer
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Η_Βγιολέτα
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •I remember why you did not want the quote posts and I still think you was right.
I understand that Twitter users feel more comfortable to be on a similar "environment" but this is not Twitter and some of us we are here exactly for that.
Giraffe Slava 🇺🇸🇺🇦
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Stefan TRMSC | eduBW
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Lisa Trombitas
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •テンセイ ・ tensei :verified:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Anne Camozzi
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Keith Wilson
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Anne Camozzi
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •joene 🏴🍉🌲
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Great!
I advise it to make it opt-in by default and make the opt-out/opt-in question configurable for server admins in config/setting.yml. I also would make bots always opt-out.
I also have a related idea about account presets. That people can choose at sign-up (or later if they want) what kind of account they want with associated settings. The account preset 'journalism and media' would e.g. enable QT's, enable discoverable, enable search indexing, etc. On the other site will the account preset 'as private as possible' enable all privacy features, post visibility to followers only, lock account, etc. Just an idea that popped out in my head. Maybe I need make it a Github issue.
Canayjun
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Cheerios de Bergerac
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Sheldon Chang 🇺🇸
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Much respect for considering this!
As a long time consumer of online communities, my sense it that the real danger with Quote Posts isn't harrasment (which can happen plenty of other ways), but they help basic misunderstandings to accelerate into angry conflict.
Giving the user the choice should greatly address that concern w/people who don't want that drama. The worst dog pile I was under came via friendly accounts after one person amplified one misunderstood one post in a thread.
llewelly
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Jake Winter
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Noah
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •John H
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Kartott™
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •OutOnTheMoors
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •tumblrina
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Trek
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Tim Chambers
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Unattributed 👤 ☑
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Question: what happens if someone quote posts a post that from an instance that has been banned on my instance?
Is this going to become a method that people use for #fediblock evasion?
What about quoted posts of people I've muted / blocked?
I think this is a much more difficult feature to implement in a large scale federated environment.
Desert Dweller 🌵
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •☕️🥞 Ȼᴏƒƒєα 🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Consent is meaningless when outcome is unknowable.
Retracting consent or consenting per quote is impossible / impractical.
We have a garbage website for dog-piles, it’s garbage.
Please not on #mastodon
Echo Rivera, PhD
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •IamWahl
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •A very granular (toot-level) opt-in function would be ok, but not just an on/off per account…
טליה (לשון את) 🎗️
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Jamie Osborne
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •An opt-out seems like the way to go. I personally do want QT but I think good faith users wouldn’t be looking to QT those who opt out anyway.
Mainly I think people (not looking to harass others) want to share posts that expect/want to be shared (news, articles, this thread) to their own followers and just add their comment or context.
Aquarius Otter
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •cybik :deifirev:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •I'll take it. Hell, here's one further suggestion:
Make it per-profile-optional. Toot itself contains a hint that it's a QRT, and each profile itself has a choice in their options to "Show Quoted Toot", "Show 'Show Quoted Toot' Buttton", or "Do not show quoted toot" (so, combo box).
Chelle (she/her) 🐸☕
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •make them opt in, not opt out. And quote posts are not able to be hidden from the original poster.
I still think they're terrible and encourage poor behavior.
Instead of conversation, people just start shouting. Encourages clout chasing, etc.
It's nice here without them.
BourbonPlanner
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •I think this is the key. Make it at least semi consensual, or have the ability to lock out QTs.
Focus on positive conversation moving boosts, not dunks.
Eric 🌊
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Siun
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Michael K Johnson
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •M.S. Bellows, Jr.
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •jaz :twt: :wales_flag:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Developer Chris Wetherell built Twitter’s retweet button. And he regrets what he did to this day.
“We might have just handed a 4-year-old a loaded weapon,” Wetherell recalled thinking as he watched the first Twitter mob use the tool he created. “That’s what I think we actually did.”
“The biggest problem is the quote retweet,” [head of Product] Goldman told BuzzFeed News. “Quote retweet allows for the dunk. It’s the dunk mechanism.”
buzzfeednews.com/article/alexk…
The Man Who Built The Retweet: “We Handed A Loaded Weapon To 4-Year-Olds”
Alex Kantrowitz (BuzzFeed)insecurity princess 🌈💖🔥
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Thanks for putting thought into this
One of the most important features is visibility into "who is linking/quoting to my post [within ActivityPub]" to enable someone to block the primary source of harassment. But especially on a decentralized protocol like ActivityPub, that's nontrivial to say the least, and most (but not all) approaches would be inevitably incomplete.
Dadmin
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Thank you for this careful approach.
I am not keen of quoted posts because I like the idea of a platform that forgets.
Quoted posts would take the control over my posts out of my hand.
Editing, deleting, reposting - all these dearly loved features of Mastodon would be at risk.
I am very happy without quoted posts 🤷
Asbjørn Ulsberg
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Orange Menace
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Stuck on Earth
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •The only way I'd like to see this happen, especially if you're going to let people opt-out of replies, is tie quotes to replies.
If a reply is boosted it should quote the post it's replying to for context when you see the boosted reply by itself in your feed (without having to click through to see the OP). That would allow people to quote post only by boosting a reply, which would also preserve your original argument against quoting in favor of replying.
Ian MacAllen
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Will Palmer
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •"quote posts" should be a type of reply. ie: quoting a post doesn't escape the thread, it just boosts the thread in your own TL at the same time as replying.
That's my only objection to a "quote" feature: it encourages drive-by comments about another thread, rather than promoting discussion within the original.
example UI: a tickbox when writing a reply which says "also boost", and on your TL it boosts the OP while also making your reply visible. Call it a boost-reply.
しかし :catjam:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •The Old Reading Room
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •@Gargron@mastodon.soc ial
Sometimes I've found quote posting helpful to explain, praise or contextualise something. I agree that it should be manageable, to minimise abuse.
Terci
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •GaryRLundberg
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •space scientist tikistitch
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Wendy Siegelman
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Pamela Barroway – Biz Editor
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •JohnW
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •That is the perfect compromise!
Opting into maybe? Instead of out of? ☑️ Quote Boosting Allowed (on this post).
Possibly only allowing it at the level of the OP?
Tom Delargy
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Rob Watts 🤷🏻♂️
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •you could push quote toot responses into the thread.
So, allow people ( subject to opt ins/outs) to quote a post, but if someone replies, then it forms part of the original thread, rather than some off kilter side shoot. Might need a little label maybe (user x quote tooted) or some other indicator.
Rotan
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •CalamusEstFortis
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Jaec
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •D3
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •post-punked
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Disabling replies I mostly see as commercial, corporate broadcasting platforms & #BillGates.
Small bug: I lose the top of my menus in a desktop browser. This is vertical 900 pixels screen in Chromium/Linux at about the middle of the screen:
Desiree
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Rajeev Kumar
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Shoq
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Taibhse 🖖
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Tony Stark
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Nonplayable
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •I think any form of quote toot would kneecap the platform's appeal to me. On the one hand you've got the timeline filling up with posts from like, parlor.toot because some well meaning doofus wanted to quote it and get their dunks in, on the other hand if you can toggle it off, you miss good people using it to hype up other good people with glowing reviews or recommendations.
Just let your boost be boost and toot be toot.
GunChleoc
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •My gut feeling tells me that that demand is coming mostly from people who came over here from Birdsite last year. Because the other site had it is not a good reason for introducing it - you should look at the quality of the demand, not the quantity.
One of the things that makes the conversations in this place more friendly is that we to NOT have this feature. Individually opting out will not fix the problems it introduces by people talking ABOUT instead of TO each other. #mastodon
David August
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Do not collapse into another site's UX just from pressure. Please consult the UX research on how such a feature impacts discourse, and make the choice, either way, with eyes open.
It may well tilt interactions here toward animosity.
The addition of quote boosts is unlikely to significantly increase adoption.
Let new features improve things, not merely mimic.
A noisy constituency should not rule the day just because they're loud.
Thank you for all your hard work. #ux
Daniël Franke 🏳️🌈
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Honestly, I don't think mastodon is nicer because of the lack of quotes, it's nicer because there's no profit driven company behind it.
I think quotes will be just fine, although it would be very nice if we'd get control about who can quote our posts.
om :WhiteHeartSparkle:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Paul D
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Joe
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Rev Mike Green :mastodon: 🇪🇺
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •plsburydoughboy (I/het/him)
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •charvaka
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •C64Tone
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Eggcredible
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •v̾i̾t̾r̾i̾o̾l̾i̾x̾
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •kaiserkiwi :kiwibird:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •dafitoo
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •ohanditdidntgo
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •NicholasR
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •👁️🫧⤴️
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Lucas :verified_trans:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Conlan Spangler
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •ares
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Samhain Night
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Lu Wilson
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Unattributed 👤 ☑
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •I missed it when I first joined back in 2019, but now I get the resistance.
I've been saying for a while now that it's important to think about how the features of an application influence the use of the application.
Quote posts are definitely at this category. I believe they have (unintentionally) promoted a less healthy environment that leads to dog-piling and brigading, and detract from direct conversation.
I feel this would have a seriously negative impact on Mastodon.
Sanjukta Paul
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •L1quid8:thorchain:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Christian Kalkhoff
in reply to Eugen Rochko • •Like this?
Christian Kalkhoff
2023-01-03 06:53:13
Dave LaMacchia
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Joey Fishkin
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •@Sanjuktampaul@mstdn.socia
Ok, wholly apart from my support for quote posts, this is a great general attitude for a developer to have!
Especially one who is now playing a big leadership role in a vast, fast-growing, and unruly community. Nice, @Gargron
I’m impressed.
Jeremy Burge
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Morgunin
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Joé McKen
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Helles Sachsen
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Eryk Salvaggio
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Deb has moved! (see profile) 🇨🇦
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •I use quote posts for curating: adding local context and making connections, in order to interest people to investigate ideas/articles that may not be obvious from the original poster's text. I'm a bumble-bee, I cross-pollinate and spread ideas into new fields 😀
With a quote, both my addition (as a pointer) and the original (the substance) are visible; but here, doing it inelegantly with Reply, the substance is hidden in the timeline :-\
sknob ⏚
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Katzentratschen
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Mikko Alasaarela
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Jigen Daisuke, Jr
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Fedilab Apps
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •"quote_id" when posting and "quote" like for "reblog" in status object.
schneider_EF
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Linguist Gone Foreign 🌏
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Chris Pirillo
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •🇳𝗮ꜟ𝖼𝘩
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Mirre :mastocheck:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •R2
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •pmroman
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •TubbDoose
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Andrea Grandi 🦕
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Elk
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •KayVay
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Shane Joseph 🐘
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Perhaps changing the format for quote posts is something to consider, I think the way Twitter does it highlights the original post far too much.
It should give enough context for the readers without attracting too much attention to the original post.
Miss Foxy Shelby
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Kim Mi
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Raccoon at TechHub :mastodon:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Andreas Dantz
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Christine Burns MBE 🏳️⚧️📚⧖
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •jakub :BlobhajSadReach:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Phil Harrison
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Please don't. It's a slippery slope to recreating just another Twitter clone.
The great thing about Mastodon is that people actually engage in conversations with each other. The lack of quote posts encourages that.
How about a "Boost and reply" button instead so that people can boost a post and reply to it with a single click.
InDefenseOfToucans
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •lord pthenq1
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •antygon
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Ulrike Hahn
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •by coincidence, I just wrote a blog post yesterday analysing some of the most popular arguments for QTs. Maybe this is of interest.
write.as/ulrikehahn/scrutinisi…
Matt Savener
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •monkeytime
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Peter Kahlert
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Time and again I feel that I need quote posts here, but eventually I find it exciting and refreshing to deal with them missing.
Because they sure will surface some bad behavior of me... Maybe you should be able to toggle off quotes for yourself, too, so you have a threshold and are less tempted.
Maybe it should ask you before quoting if you are about to say something nice, and if not if you wouldn't rather just block the person.
But I am happy for all those quote enthuasiasts if the feature is coming. Thank you for your efforts anyway 😀
micropainter
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Error
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Silversnapples
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •There's a lot of demand for sugar but it doesn't make it better for us. I'm wondering how much extra work it may it may not create for site moderators.
Not that I know an awful lot.
Moving to Mastadon has reminded me how basic my IT skills are. I'm okay with being humbled.
embrace
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Masto.poetry
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Preston de Guise 🏳️🌈✍🏼
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •- Users can opt-in to allowing quote posts (in general)
- A user can allow a quote-post on an individual toot
-If a user feels a toot is being abused through a quote-post, they can disable it for the post retrospectively & revoke any quote-posts that had been done.
Blake Reilly | Ekyllier
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
YouTubeEmma Zhou
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Jon Molnar :d20:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •my two cents: this feature should not be added unless it is supported by ActivityPub. Breaking compatibility with the rest of the Fediverse defeats the primary goal of the project.
If that means getting the standard updated first, so be it. There is no rush. We've been making do without this feature since the beginning.
Aurora ✅
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •moggie
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Wolkenreich
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Fascinating Europe
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Zekovski
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •There is no need for it for the software to work. I hope you do not add it.
I get the feeling the demands are mostly from (ex)Twitter users who haven't had the time to get used to here and want to keep their habits.
Chris Pitts
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Please don’t. Having been active here for a little while it has become increasingly obvious that there is nothing that quote posts add that cannot be achieved in other, more constructive ways.
You seem to have found an elusive behavioural ‘nudge’ that encourages engagement while discouraging polarisation and tribalism. Don’t let the Twitter influx persuade you to turn Mastodon into another Twitter. Thank you!
bees 🐝
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Jcmacomber
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •It is a good way to learn something in condensed form.
Fernby Films
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Sebastian :mastoprincess:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •PeoriaBummer
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •would it be possible to give the person quoted some degree of control? For example, if they blocked the quoter, maybe they would no longer show up in the quoted post.
This seems like a compromise that might mitigate the bullying problem a bit.
Thomas E. Gladwin
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •I think it's now effectively a referendum on changing the culture to something with the risks and benefits of Twitter. It seems to me the core aim is to make it easier to use social media for influence, clout, and manipulation vs than "same-level" communication. It'll always be claimed to be for the greater good of course.
One question is whether you want the responsibility for mitigating the known risks of empowering that culture. Or is the next step "helpful" volunteers taking over?
Julien Avérous
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •christian frock ☕
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Oblomov
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Maltimore
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Floon
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Tim Richards
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Hans-Günter Brünker
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Now I'm quite happy, that we don't have it here ...
Daniel Hunter
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •metkcom 🏹
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •mumu
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Su Butcher
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Micke
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •pengzell.bsky.social
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Nodami
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Tingelmans 😎
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Ann Hawkins
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •St. Paul :verified:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •please don’t do this, quote tweeting is mostly folks trying to dunk on one another with bs hot takes, there’s no need for that here and Mastodon is better without it.
If folks want to quote tweet, let ‘‘em do it old school style and copy/paste with rt tag.
Antti Peltola
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •I donate to #mastodon project mainly to get quote posts.
When you eliminate the #algorithm that incentives nastiness to generate more impressions for more ad revenue then it removes incentive to abuse quote posts.
Eugen Rochko
Unknown parent • • •Petar Toushkov
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Suzan 🇪🇺
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •I don't like share toots without adding a comment why I want to share it.
Vitor de Lucca :verig: :verpr:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Roadskater, Ph.D.
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Max
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •I don't like them but I also don't care that much about it.
My view is that Quoting detracts from the original post and puts the focus on the quoter. Any boosts or likes on the quote are not reflected as boosts or likes on the original, unless you make some interesting technical decisions 😅.
Knowing the reach and effect of your post is useful and quoting will dull that ability. It will effectively give a tool for influencers and trolls.
This feature should be known as Quote Boost.
Simon Kowalewski
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •lenatrad
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Liv Pouetrouchka
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •John Ribbon
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Billie
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •simply don't!
They just want you to clone #birdsite with its negative effects.
⛳ rebel
in reply to Billie • • •@Billie
Please don't, the Fediverse and also Mastodon have developed like this so far and after years here you also notice the positive effect precisely because of the lack of it.
Yes, the demand for it comes back with every wave and it makes you tired, but we should still not introduce it.
It is precisely the lack of it that makes for better discussions, and those who have good reasons for it can do so easily by another means.
suldrew 🚲🏳️🌈
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Nakul Shenoy 🕴️
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Kate Watson
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Jörn Reinhardt
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •cmcalgary
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •FvH 🦣
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Nick Parfene
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Richard Hoekstra
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •elle
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •SuiR
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •D. Creemer
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •elle
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Martijn Tonies ✅
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •I believe there's an item in the tracker for it? And it includes settings in the account "allow quote posts" and per toot settings "account default/allow quote/disallow quote"?
That would be giving people options.
Benj Soule🫂💙HumanityFirst🌅
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Simone
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •I recently read that the lack of this feature is responsible for the other demeanour of people here. You can't toot just to your bubble, everything you toot is visible for all, this makes it harder to rally warriors against others. With that in mind, I think it's better to continue to do without it.
By the way: Thanks for this wonderful platform. I'm amazed about the decent and civilized exchange here. For me, this makes it a place where I like to take part in. 🙏 🙏 🙏
Niels :verified:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •I hate people boosting something without adding their view or opinion on the matter. If I follow you, I want YOUR opinion, not that of a stranger.
Contrary to most, I think quoted boosts should be the only kind of boosts allowed. I would definitely appreciate the option to see only quoted boosts and hide all others.
Willem van Asperen
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Timmy
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •chiasm
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Pengo Wray
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •樹ちゃん
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Raoul Plommer
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •The Left Independent 🇵🇸
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Sam Hogarth
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •the lack of quote tweets makes for a calmer and friendlier network, I've found, with less focus on engagement and the negative effects of pile-ons. I hope it's not added.
But if it is added, I also hope there's an option to turn that off, and turn it off in bulk.
The 37th Wombat 📚
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •kolya
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Perseus
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Nova🐧✨
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •CurlyParakeet
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •wobweger :verified:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •pasting in a link,
speeding that up would be very much appreciated 🙂
abcxyz
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Sammi
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •CTrevethan🐡🥣
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •footnote: this is just a thought. I do not wish to open a debate on tools of any sort. only table saw vs circular saw.
Archaide :verified:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Christian Kalkhoff
in reply to Archaide :verified: • •Benjamin Hollon 🇺🇸🇲🇾🇮🇳🇦🇫
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Darkstar
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Iris Volk
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Walter van Holst
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Gabino Luis
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Alex A.
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •FediTips has moved!
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Demand doesn't necessarily mean something is a good idea though?
There's a lot of demand for centralisation, but that would be a really bad idea.
GJ Groothedde 🇪🇺
in reply to FediTips has moved! • • •Akhenatobi & Meritaten etc.
in reply to FediTips has moved! • • •Vitor de Lucca :verig: :verpr:
in reply to FediTips has moved! • • •Medallish
in reply to FediTips has moved! • • •Phil
in reply to FediTips has moved! • • •Deurman@fosstodon $ :idle:
in reply to FediTips has moved! • • •@feditips
@Gargron I mean, if you don't want to use it, then don't use it, right?
FediTips has moved!
in reply to Deurman@fosstodon $ :idle: • • •@deurman
We aren't just individuals, we are all part of a community.
If the community turns toxic, we all suffer.
Features which encourage toxicity harm all of us, because they affect how people around us behave. Toxicity promotes aggression, suspicion and stress, it makes the world a nastier place to live in.
Deurman@fosstodon $ :idle:
in reply to FediTips has moved! • • •Honestly, I don't really see how it was used in such a toxic matter. I'm not saying it wasn't, just not my experience. That might also explain why I don't have such a hard stance against it. Then again, I didn't truly experience how toxic Twitter could be for myself up until recently. I never really posted or replied there tho, that might be why too. I just mainly watched some gaming news accounts and YouTubers and such. I never got into politics much there.
jakub :BlobhajSadReach:
in reply to FediTips has moved! • • •Andrew Hinton
in reply to FediTips has moved! • • •I wonder if the community could organically enforce a standard of etiquette with them? Like with spoilers? If an algorithm isn’t massively juicing the reach, seems like it could be called out & shamed into less of a problem?
Bridge&Tunnel Jeff
in reply to FediTips has moved! • • •jjjjeeppyyaanngg 🧝♀️
in reply to FediTips has moved! • • •Ɲєιƚ Ƃιɍƌ 凤
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •I missed QTs when I first moved from the fowl site, but have since come to think of them as net negative.
I wonder if an all-in-one option to reply and then boost the reply would cover the need? (IOW, on reply, offer toot/toot-then-boost)
nerdy-horse-digital
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Wawuschel, toxic JägerJägerin
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •please don't.
I think that most people who ask for it don't understand what #mastodon is about, that quote toots would change one of the most important aspects here: we talk with/to each other, not over/about others.
That Girl Over There
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •People need to stop being lazy about how they interact with people.
Social media needs to be more social, less antisocial narcissist. 👍
Jane
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Aka Hige
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •I hugely appreciate your willingness to listen and consider users' feedback.
All platforms are evolving on daily basis. Status quo is not set in stone as if some kind of founding fathers' constitutions. Discussion is necessary and beneficial to create a better platform.
For the record, I belong to the camp of "No" to QT and think QT generally a bad idea. However, I also firmly believe the best user experience is always to give users *more control* how to use it.
Thanks again.
Luke MacNeil
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Fredrik Graver
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •GMcGath
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •lorax b. horne 🍉
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Hobson Lane
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Andrew
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Ivan Maljukanović :lgbt_io:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •I personally don't see any problem in just replying/commenting on a post to make it visible to more people.
People need to get used to that #mastodon and #fediverse in general is and should be different to centralized social networks.
In this case, just click on a post with a @mention, a check the original post. It takes only one more step, but it definitely increases communication and engagement.
(Matthew)=> return 🏳🌈🇿🇦🎮💻📖
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Roadskater, Ph.D.
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •The Gneech
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •John Samuel
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Rachel Lawson
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •If you must do it, consider how to back out. Consider how to record incidents of it being misused.
Paul Fisher
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Lars Marowsky-Brée 😷
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •TimP
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Dave Diamond
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Krita :vlpn_pat_melt:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Liam @ GamingOnLinux 🐧🎮
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Wim Turnhout 🇺🇦 🍉
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Torb (old account)
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Bruce Don
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •fuomag9
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Tathar makes stuff
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Got Root :hispagatos: # :idle:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Nichtsdestotrotz
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Rastal
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •The demand comes exclusively from those who want Mastodon to be Twitter.
Mastodon is not Twitter.
Kayna (Lauren_Wu)
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Matteo Ceriotti
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Douglas Phillips Books
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Yahia Lababidi
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •What’s #quote #post mean? Sharing #inspiration sayings, for example?
#NewHere & confused…
Himmelssohn
Unknown parent • • •ollibaba
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •So how about the ability for "commented boosts": you can attach a reply to your boost, so that your timeline afterwards shows your reply, with the boosted post as a "quote".
That way you would still reply inside the thread (ie. talk _to_ the original poster, rather than _about_ them), and you would boost the original post; but your followers would mainly see your comment (and also the boosted post, for context).
(cf. chaos.social/@ollibaba/1095903…)
#quotePosts #qt #quotes
Phoenix Wyllow
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Imagine "quote tooting" against your post instead of all this feedback
Sebastian
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Kay :heart_bi: :tinoflag:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •elizabeth veldon
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Grant :verified:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Sye
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Ms AB ☕
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Ross
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Whereas if the original post was shown the same as a regular boost but with the new content as additional context, that may help keep the usage positive
Hans Konings - kamasys HQ
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Jak2k 🐧🦀
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •K'mal
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •SQLAllFather
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •7sleepersmusic
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •aeva
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Kevin Marks
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •dprk_ebooks
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Richard Shaw
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Quote Tweets drove my off Twitter.
I really do not want to see endless variations of people of one political persuasion, saying that people of a different political persuasion are stupid.
Quote tweets very rarely lead to additional incites, but does lead to timelines being filled with nonsense.
Yes toxic behaviour is generally driven by people not just technology, but people don't want to admit to their own failings. So best not to make it too easy for toxic behaviour.
Reinout ✅️
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Aemstuz
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Geri ™
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Tends toward sanctimony. I'm not a fan.
"Listen to this silly little girl" etc
kjuh :antifa:🇺🇦🇪🇺🇩🇪😷
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Kroos
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •If this were Musk
QT*: @Gargron this shithead is going to brick the Fediverse
*Quote tooted satirically
Witchy 🏳️🌈
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Moke :csharp:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Wieke
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Esther :mastodon: 🌱🐾🍋 #fcknzs
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •gavinisdie :troll:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •abortretryfail
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Toxy 🔬🇪🇺🇸🇪🇬🇧🇺🇦
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Amy Lundy
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Sam :solus: :budgie:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •frederic
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Richard Gadsden
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •My suggestion would be to have a system where an attempt to quote-post results in a notification being sent to the person being quoted who can then choose to approve or deny.
That should do several things: prevents people using quoting instead of replies (because quoting is much slower), and prevent the sort of hostile quotes that are used to call in a mob against someone.
It's also anti-viral.
Nigel Pugh (he/him/they)
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •on #Mastodon you can share a link to the post mastodon.social/@Gargron/10962… screen shot it, quote it in Alt text, but all takes considered time…
All ‘Quote posts’ on Twitter did was get rid of Modified Tweet - MT? It made things fast and easy!
Quote posts on #Twitter can be supportive or abusive, but the efficiency of it makes it fast. Isn’t this space a more considered, mindful space, speeding things up helps people to be less considerate?
Eugen Rochko
2023-01-03 06:37:13
Michigander :toad:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Mahmoud - محمود عبدالجواد
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Matt E Hudson
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Laura Sykes #Greeneralia
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •People for whom it is truly important could migrate there. Those of us who miss them, but are learning to appreciate life without them (and without the concomitant pile-ons) could stay put?
Just an idea...
Bill's in the shop for repairs
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Tae Kim
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •☹️ look at the vitriol during the quote tweet dunking on Lex Friedman’s book list and Skip Bayless’ NFL game comment just in the past week on Twitter. The two tweets dominated discussion. Tens of millions if not hundreds of millions of outrage views and angry heat posts with little substance.
It is not worth the engagement. It will change the atmosphere and the vibe on here to be far worse.
Aad Groeneveld
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Nawen Brightsong
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Sar
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Felicity Martin
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •What’s wrong with simply opening up a Toot reply from someone you follow to see the thread if it appears interesting? Mayba tiny bit more effort, bu it keeps timelines cleaner and less demanding of attention
DavidB🍥
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Jaco G
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Swapnil Hiremath :renal: MD
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •@ecological_fallacy please no. It’s a tool that makes dunking and bullying easier.
It’s for people who want to add their own ‘editorial’ comment rather than humbly reply and enrich the original conversation.
Please don’t bring in quote posts.
stuffy
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Pinko Palest
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Bc Clarity Carlton-Martin
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •casey is remote
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •I am pleasantly surprised. This is good.
I'm a big fan of quote posts but I hope you add a toggle in the FE settings to disable it, considering how many people are equally opposed to this.
Ostrich
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Mel
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Daniel
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Alan Langford
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •jfrazier
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Profane Mystic
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •𝗔rtilect𝗭ed
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •The only use I saw for it when I poked around on Truth Social for a few days (wanted to see what they did to Mastodon) was for trolling. I really didn't see an actual reason for it. I would think it's going to be a headache when editable posts are thrown into the mix.
Seems like we've been doing just fine without quoted posts 🤷♂️
𝚂𝚝𝚎𝚙𝚑𝚎𝚗 𝙵𝚒𝚛𝚝𝚑 :verified:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •My experience gere so far has been overwhelmingly positive and that, I have come to the conclusion, is because the blasted "quote" doesn't exist.
Stay positive.
Chris Godwin :masto_verify:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Alberto GM
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Teresa Rothaar :420: :420grey:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Bill Dollins
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Noah Mittman :oh_no_bubble:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Joshua Holland
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Halitrax
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •sky⁉️🪷
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Damon Kiesow
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Soliyra (she/they)
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Patricia Aas
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Maggieci democracy enjoyer
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •CommentateurAvisé 🇫🇷🇪🇺 4💉
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Hey @El_Jere !!!!
Que quoi entamer 2023 avec le sourire...
[homemade QRT]
Erlend
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •I don't feel strongly either way. But I DO feel strongly that changing ones mind (and listening to others) is a very good trait in humans. Especially in leaders - which you are, in a way.
I agree that it should be opt-out and implemented thoughtfully.
EarthOne
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Dan Moved to Retro.social
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Dekkzz :emacs:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •ራስ ባሪያው Rass Bariaw
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •katejjeffery
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Tim :D
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •after reading some of these replies.. I don’t feel like theres anything wrong with quoting a post. It’s just a repost with a comment. All in one place.
You can’t really get context for someone reposting a picture or video unless you go to their profile and see if they added a follow up post like “as per my last post”.
It did get a bed rep from Twitter, but I think this feature in the hands of mastodon users would be beneficial to engaging and understanding people.
Kansas Grant
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •John Kostiuk :coffee_swirl:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Werawelt
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •When I want to quote, I do it with copy and paste.
Please do not introduce automated citations.
The rapid, often ill-considered impulse is interrupted by the effort of copy and paste.
If you want to talk seriously about a quote, make the effort.
Those who only want to react in the heat of the moment need automatisms to make it easier.
So please don't introduce something like that here on our mostly peaceful #Mastodon. 🙏
JP.Q
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •ÉLw38 🌋
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Hiker Geek 🌲💻🌲
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •I am new here but my online roots go back to running a Wildcat! BBS starting in the late 80's.
You made the right decision to not allow QT's and I hope you stick with it. Opt in just seems like it would be a mess.
I just read this whole thread and without any QT's it just flowed in a relatively focused way. I like Mastodon for this.
Would QT's increase the moderation burden on Instance Admins? That would be bad.
How many levels would be allowed? Could I QT a QT of a QT of a QT?
L. David Baron
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •NightCatArts
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Muin
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Kartott™
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Jim Hunter
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Alex Vranas
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •I highly recommend reading this if you haven't already: buzzfeednews.com/article/alexk…
I'm not 100% against quote posts, but if implemented tactlessly they're a one-way ticket to toxicity. Let's try to avoid implementing a "dunk mechanism".
The Man Who Built The Retweet: “We Handed A Loaded Weapon To 4-Year-Olds”
Alex Kantrowitz (BuzzFeed)ElOssiPolar
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •@apps
Magess :heart_ace:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •I think the focus is too much on harassment and not enough about what it will do to the flow of communication.
Replies: you -> OP
QT: you ABOUT OP -> Followers
It's the difference between conversation and commentary. A lot of people who like masto like that people are finally talking *to* them.
Not that I don't see value in commentary. I use Tumblr a lot. But you don't go to Tumblr to have a conversation. It's not for talking to people.
A gossip feature will change the tone here
Indigo
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Chris H #ChoirsForClimate
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Ty Dunitz
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •For what it’s worth, I feel there’s more cases against than for.
At the very least, please consider the requirement that the original poster can consent or not to their content being quoted.
whetstone
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •ozon
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Cat Power
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •crusom :blob_anar_raccoon:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Aziz Poonawalla
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •I think that some of the pushback is from people who think quote replies makes #mastodon "into (the worst version of) twitter" but there's no reason that will be true.
As a feature it us useful for providing context to a boost, without obscuring it.
It also could be a client side implementation with a show parent button for any reply
mike bayer :python: :redhat:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Саша Морс, here we go again...
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •fluffy 💜
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •@vyr the problem with Twitter isn’t that it’s centralized, but that it’s Twitter
Please don’t turn mastodon all the way into Twitter, it’s already way too close as it is
Joel Hill
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •chillin :verified:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Gracious Anthracite
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Alex Bardsley :orangewine:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Markus
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Barnaby
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Bathsheba Blue
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •sam.sh
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •JL Johnson :veri_mast:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •piofthings
Unknown parent • • •British Tech Guru
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •piofthings
Unknown parent • • •LizWhoFan
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Nicholas Mamo
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Artha
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Lesley Carhart :unverified:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Ückück :ueckueck::pd::af:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Hoffe sehr, dass die zitierten Beiträge nicht kommen.
Die Argumente, die dagegen sprechen, sind ja weithin bekannt (z.B. Förderung toxischer Umgangston, "Übereinander reden") und ich würde allen, die unbedingt sowas brauchen, dringend Dienste wie Friendica empfehlen, die diese Funktion bereits haben.
Lukas
in reply to Ückück :ueckueck::pd::af: • • •@ueckueck Auch wenn ich es selbst kritisch sehe und nicht weiß, wie sich die negativen Aspekte ausgemerzen lassen, aber vielleicht schafft es das Entwicklungsteam Mastodons um @Gargron ja eine Möglichkeit zu schaffen, die die negativen Aspekte bei der Implementierung aktiv berücksichtigt.
Vielleicht wäre die eine "Opt-In Funktion per User" etwas - also dass User einer Zitierung von eigenen Beiträgen aktiv zustimmen muss?
Lukas
in reply to Lukas • • •@ueckueck
Ich würde die Frage aus Interesse mal an
#FediAdmin #FediverseModerationsTreff #FediModeration weitergeben wollen: Könnte eine "Opt-In per User mit Genehmigungsprozess"-Funktion eine Option für Zitierbare Beiträge sein?
cc: @ij @M @kirschwipfel @barning @fries @ebinger @wir @milan @Cedara
ij
in reply to Lukas • • •@w4ts0n @ueckueck @M @kirschwipfel @barning @fries @ebinger @wir @milan @Cedara Ich wuerde beim Kurs bleiben, keinen Quote Tweet zu implementieren. Wer auf einen Post verweisen will, ohne direkt im Thread zu antworten, kann dies ja bereits heute mit z.B. Friendica oder per kopierten Link tun. Wer zu faul ist, den Link zu kopieren, ist halt zu faul, den Link zu kopieren.
Quote Toots sind keine Diskussionen mit den Leuten, sondern Gespraeche ueber die Leute. Opt-In ist IMHO zu viel Aufwand
ij
in reply to ij • • •Ückück :ueckueck::pd::af:
in reply to ij • • •@ij
@w4ts0n @M @kirschwipfel @barning @fries @ebinger @wir @milan @Cedara
Dachte, dass im Moment opt-out geplant ist - Was mMn ein riesengroßer Unterschied ist.
Aber mein Hauptproblem ist ja, dass wenn es eine kritische Masse nutzt, sich die allgemeine Kultur ändert. Hin zum "übereinander reden".
Spannend ist z.B., dass ein lieber Bekannter und ich gestern getestet haben, ob ich auf Mastodon benachrichtigt werde, wenn er auf Friendica und auf Misskey Beiträge von mit zitiert. Aber da wird nix angezeigt. Mastodon hat das einfach nicht implementiert.
Wir sind also aktuell nicht nur in der Situation, dass sich Menschen nicht wehren können, dass sie so zitiert werden, sie bekommen es als Masto-Nutzer•innen nicht mal mit.
So wie es jetzt ist, ist also auch Mist.
(1/2)
reticuleena
in reply to ij • • •Greg Wasserstrom
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Max Kennerly
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •tipjip
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •the roamer
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •I hope you will keep QTs out.
All design decisions are compromises, and yes there are valid arguments in favour of a QT feature. The arguments against QTs have the benefit of being backed by the reality of Mastodon's discussion culture, which we want to preserve and which was shaped by ruling out QTs.
9 out of 10 of those loudly demanding QTs have never asked how they might benefit from not using them. Their very loudness is the strongest argument against QTs.
Troy McClure
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Ita Ryan
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Eremit
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Rob Bos
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Thomas H Jones II
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Larry Garfield
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •I definitely think there's ways it can be done well. I used them a lot on Twitter to "yes and" threads I supported.
Yes, others sometimes used them to brigade, which is bad. But there are also ample good uses. Designing it in a way to maximize the good uses and minimize the bad ones is a challenge, I agree, but a worthwhile one.
Laure
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Terra Wellington
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •bugwitched 🐝🐇🦨 🎃🧙🐸
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Kevan
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •EVHaste
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Just adding a voice to the “I’d really rather we didn’t” category. The experience of browsing mastodon vs ye olde Twitter is night and day in regards to original content.
I think it’s inevitable that QT functionality empowers folks to have endless “takes” on the same posts. Even taking the harassment angle out of it (which is quite seriously imho) it’s not good for post quality.
Lahinch Surf Shop
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Olga
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Shield Maiden
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Miriam
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •I’d rather copy, paste and label it myself. Like this: QT. ***I don't feel as strongly about quote posts as I did in 2018. Personally, I am not a fan, but there is clearly a lot of demand for it. We're considering it.***
I used the old AOL boards and we had convos that lasted for days at times. We all Quoted one another to keep the conversation going. People need a way to quote one another, but a complete Quote Toot is not worth the harassment it will bring.
Adam Curry :pci: :pc2blue:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Werawelt
Unknown parent • • •Correct: it becomes immensely complex.
What do the #moderators have to say about it?
They have the best overview of the work they already have without such a feature.
And they would certainly get even more work if something like this were introduced.
Most of them do it on a voluntary basis and on a donation basis.
I think they are being asked to do too much.
Colorado Carol 🌻
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •AaronHuertas
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Son of Sandor
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •newsie.social/@mlq3/1096247663…
Stephen Sherman
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •The #twitterexodus has slowed down. All the noobs (myself included) are getting settled in and adjusted. Let it ride for a while longer.
It's amazing how "I can't live without feature X," morphs into, "What was that feature X about anyway?" #qt #mastodon
Charlton Trezevant
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •sandozz
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Song Du :rocinante:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Fediverse Enhancement Proposal:
codeberg.org/fediverse/fep/src…
fep
Codeberg.orgRoger Moore
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •RGB805
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Gawain
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Catmama 🐈
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Elz de Korte
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •John Levine✅
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Mark Willard :epcot:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Why the Past 10 Years of American Life Have Been Uniquely Stupid
Jonathan Haidt (The Atlantic)chaos / genders
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •From whom though? Folks who have been here a long time and are intentionally working against make this Twitter 2.0? Or those that swarmed here under the promise that's what Mastodon was? I've only ever seen the demand lately and from the latter. When I've seen quote posts in the wild on the Fediverse, it has always taken the form of harassment.
Not only do we have the chance to break from the past and do better, but this decision affects the rest of the Fediverse, too.
pedvro
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Rodolfo
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •@Annalee
Should you decide to include such a #feature in a future version of #Mastdon, I’d like to suggest a companion feature to release at the same time: The ability to block #quote toots / quote posts.
Thank you for all your hard work and for your consideration.
Martin 🧀
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •I think quote tweets are a good reason Twitter is so toxic. Just people commenting on things without actually interacting with the person.
I don't want that Mastodon becomes the new toxic Twitter.
Laurie MacBride
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Thomas A. Fine :verified:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •As a recent joiner from Twitter, who used this feature frequently, I vote against.
Most of the time I didn't misuse it. But a few times I did.
You can accomplish the same manually. The tiny additional effort gives enough pause to rethink whether referring to someone's content rather than directly engaging is the best option.
Cheeky Kokako
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Rocio
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Jeff
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •jenhansen
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Ben S.
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Ruben Bolling 🪲
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •waiting for the rain
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Henry Edward Hardy
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •There is a demand to make Mastodon into a clone of twitter.
Is that what we want?
If people want to fork the code or submit a patch then they could do that.
@Gargron
John “Mastodon“ O’Briant
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •TimNMurph
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •EthanRDoesMC
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •my first reaction was to quote post.
In my short time on Mastodon vs twitter, NOT having quote posts has led to more direct interactions with the OP, and less knee-jerk reactions to posts.
Maybe quote posts could be a *type of reply*? A button that says “include original post”? Might be some benefits to that as well, i.e. in a reply to a megathread, you could quote a specific status. Or even another reply. All while in the original context.
Jonah Saesan
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Its Gregory
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Henriette Pilkes 🌻🍀🦋
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Deb
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Mastodon has a unique feel. I sincerely hope you don't add them.
Kat Folland
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •taco :blobcat_thisisfine:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Mattias Schlenker
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Eric the Cerise
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Lennart Quispel
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Actually, I think the premisse of the argument against it is not correct. Sure, quote posts have been misused for bad behaviour. But that does not neccesarily mean that quote posts are inherently bad.
When I look at my current twitter timeline, most quote tweets I see are not used to attack persons. Mostly, they are used to give something context, to give some extra information, or to explain why it would be interesting. There are some personal attacks, but not much ...
Anthony Niximacco
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Eric Gilmour
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Dave Swersky
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Franz van Betteraey
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Jason Spyromilio Ιάσων
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •AGF : poemproducer
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Tucker Teague
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Maxi 10x 💉
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Aria Burrell
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Bianca
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Firoozye
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •readermom
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •towo
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •I'd like to throw chaos.social/@towo/10956730992… into the ring here.
Didn't get a lot of feedback on it, but to me, it might seem a reasonable compromise of being able to showcase one's contextualization (the usual "good" QP use case) and not ripping a discussion away from the original thread, as is often indicated to be a bad feature in this context.
Very much open to discussion on this, though, because I likely overlooked something major.
palmdoc
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Gene Regulation
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Mr. Funk E. Dude
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Dr. Farhana Sultana
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •carlyn
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Leftwardswing
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Bristle
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Mattstodon 🏳️⚧️
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Jesse
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Jessica Craven
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Lee 🌏
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •If that would work, technically?
Will Robertson
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •James Slezak
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Sarail
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Miguel de Icaza ᯅ🍉
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •june
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Markus of the Cat
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Darcy Casselman
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •normally, I'd want to quote this and express to my followers that I'm happy it's being reconsidered and hope that people's concerns about the feature can also be addressed somehow.
Feels weird to have to address you directly.
MWT
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •𝑫𝒂𝒗𝒆𝑮. 🇺🇸
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Anthra
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Charlie Charlie
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Cullen
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •"there is clearly a lot of demand for it"
In that case, bear in mind that voices for change are usually louder and more vociferous than voices that support the status quo. People from the UK will know what I mean.
\ˈthē-ˈˈärd-ˌvärk\
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Maybe consider that a supermajority should be required to support any decision to change.
D-Love :uv:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •fionaschlachter
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Leo Burtscher
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •StroomAfwaarts 🍋
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •And if you do, make it opt-in.
Wyrd by Word
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •De Patrijsvogel
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Idris Elbow Macaroni
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •> I don’t feel as strongly about quote posts as I did in 2018.
tbf, your harassment inpipe may have peaked; some of the little ppl still just want a place that isn’t being lit on fire every five minutes as opposed to every ten
just saying, Eugen. there’s a lot of ppl willing to tell you whatever just to make money
but I suspect you’ve noticed that, too 🤷♀️
§ Jason
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Charles X Cross
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Laura SSM
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Alexander Knochel
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Bradley :smugcat:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •europlus :autisminf:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Benj Soule🫂💙HumanityFirst🌅
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •k cavaliere
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Tim Ellis (he/him) DJDynamicNC
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •ChrisAdamsEcon :betahat:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •AstroCartridge :fedora:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •And has the enormous probability of becoming extremely toxic, rapidly.
I am, and always will be, for creating original content, not leeching on others' for fame.
IMO, the main reason for qrt is that people come from twitter, are used to it and cannot handle change, but Mastodon must pave its own way. Next? Algo?
Instagram put "stories" copying tiktok, and now is an endless shitstorm of videos, far from the elegant photo posting it once was.
Urzl
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •schamspeare
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Xero Kane ✅
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Jonathan Wexler
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Thomas Guss
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •lucie digitální
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •@mrwclarkson@c.im
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Jill Minor
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Karen Elaine 💫
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Liam 🏴
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •as a user who has previously voiced support for quoting, I feel almost obligated to request that it /not/ be implemented. It's one of those little "not here" things that I think has made using Mastodon that much kinder on my brain.
...that said, it would improve my "credit to user XYZ who found this" workflow immensely, which makes up like 90% of my threads on Bird Hell. Dunno if I'd be doing the same here - I've mostly been keeping myself "focused" on rambling
Nancy M Ruff
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Tom Delargy
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Tom Delargy
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •clay anderson 🇺🇦🇮🇱🔰🥑🌐🚲🗽☢️
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Juan Arzola
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •- they allow posts to reference more than 1 post, not just one.
- backlinks that haven’t been approved by the orig author or from blocked users don’t show up in a post
- unlike “quote posts” they don’t require users to learn a new concept for the compose UI, they just paste links to other posts as they normally would do when they want to reference them.
Working with backlinks - Obsidian Help
help.obsidian.mdΠαρδαλό Κατσίκι ✔️ Pied Goat
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •The absence of tre quote feature was one essential factor differentiating Mastodon from Twitter and discouraging aggressive and abusive behaviors while giving space to engagement and exchange.
Whoever wants to agree or disagree with a statement, post, point of view can do it, there are ways for that.
No need to go backwards and use a feature that has no positive record on Twitter, in my humble opinion.
Thanks.
pax
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Prof. Stefan Rahmstorf
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Prof. Stefan Rahmstorf
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Julian ♪🌻🥥🌴♫
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Peter Däubler
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Lukas
Unknown parent • • •sudo βραχυκύκλωμα :kafeneio:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Quoting a user's post means that the quoting user doesn't reply to the original subject and context but instead is promoting his/her opinion/comment by *using* the original one. Therefore such a move will result to a passive aggressive-by-design medium (at best) when the actual objective is to create content and respond productively. Also this behavior is generally unacceptable IRL, why having it here?
Chris
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Babu Menos 🎵
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Please don’t.
Please, please, PLEASE don’t!
Over the short period of time that I am actively using Mastodon, it has become so much more Twitter-like, including all the negative parts, and QT’s are a essential ingredient to the 🐦 site’s un-culture. So far, Mastodon is faring quite well in dampening the Twitter effect, but there is certainly a breaking point — and that might very well come with QT’s.
Freakinbox
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •they aren't any different to replies and can be reported all the same. 🤷♂️
I'd like to not see ones of people I blocked.. Like at all. Twitter shows me what the QTer posts.. I don't even want that of I have the original poster blocked. 👍
ij
Unknown parent • • •Also wenn, dann ergibt nur pro Toot für mich Sinn. Und das halt auch nur dann, wenn ich das nicht generell machen kann, sondern bei jedem User erneut gefragt werde. Schliesslich kann ich es ja durchaus begrüßen, wenn User A das macht, aber mißbilligen, wenn User B das machen will.
So, und dann bau mal ein System, was das zuverlässig hinbekommt und das über Software-Grenzen hinweg. ;)
Lukas
in reply to ij • • •Hughster
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •It'd be helpful to clarify what "QT" means here.
Twitter #QTs work more as a kind of "alt-reply" function, more "branching off a conversation" than simply linking to a post, with 3 essential attributes:
1. The other post is displayed as if it's a seamless part of ones own
2. The other person is notified just as with a reply or @-mention
3. QTs are listed under "x Quoted Posts" under the original post
When one says "I want QTs", is this what one means? Would anything less be enough?
The Green Lens
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Jordi Margalef
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •On the desktop is not as bad since it's easier to open new window, but on an Android mobile it's quite difficult.
Michael Meese 🇪🇺
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •David Fleetwood - RG Admin
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •reticuleena
in reply to ij • • •Giselle's very old account
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Doa :kermitsip:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •k_taka🔖
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •I somewhat oppose posts that quote all of one post like Twitter.
If it is a partial citation of a post or web article, that is, a correct citation, I may agree.
p.s.
I hope you relaunch the profile category implementation. There are more people here than before.
andrei
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •marimo jones
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •StuartB
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •I would also suggest that the ability to use QTs is liked to this - you can only QT other people if yours are also quotable.
(I know of more than a few people who would abuse this while turning it off for themselves.)
Molotov Cockatiel Games (Bill)
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Catherine Russell
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Hal Nordlin :vibing:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Lia Matera
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •healyn
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •k_taka🔖
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •As in the past, I think the Mastodon way is to use the reply function for comments on another account.
So when boosting a post, it might be nice to be able to choose whether to pull only the article URL, reply to that post comment, or simply repost (share) them. It would also be interesting to have the ability to list the comments posted to web articles.
Martin Enders (he/him)
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •I don't like it.
I joined the fediverse some months ago and really enjoy that people talk with each other and not about other people, which I think will start with commented boosts.
I think it is a good thing that discussions related to a toot are only possible in one direction and avoid fuzzyfication of discussion.
It avoids that accounts with high numbers of followers take over the work/ideas of others and start a new discussion in their bubble.
Just my 2ct
undead enby of the apocalypse
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Rick Gaehl
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •NEND
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Sami Seppo FI (+EN)
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •It's understandable that in 2018, a year after the initial releasing of Mastodon, the level of idealism was probably peaking.
Since a more practical but common sense approaching to various (and not too essential) topics have emerged, been emerging.
That's the way to maintain certain core virtues/values and make the platform more widely used and easier to adopt for common SoMe sapiences.👍
Tim Dawson :Blobhaj:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Eckes :mastodon:
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Alexander 🐘
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •That is one of the things that suck most about Mastodon. The lack of a quote feature.
Jan Žegklitz
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Maggie Maybe
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •MagicLike 🏳️🌈
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •