@BigFoxBoss Errrmm... no?
What you're describing is making an offshoot thread. Which is what I'm trying to avoid.
Top-level
@BigFoxBoss Errrmm... no? What you're describing is making an offshoot thread. Which is what I'm trying to avoid. 3 comments
@BigFoxBoss I don't want "hopefully", I want proper, parsable semantics. |
@drq @mittorn @skobkin
You complain about already getting offshoot threads, many people asking/saying similar things, wanting to reply to all of them, and you want to solve that in-place right?
Within a thread: mention them in the _reply_ to the original post to (hopefully) redirect them to a different branch for a discussion.
Outside thread: dedicated post, literal offshoot thread, which I'm guessing is not what you want.
As for the technical side of things, not everyone would want a "quote-tweet" thing if it would break compatibility and/or ddos them when hellthread inevitably erupts somewhere. Some if not most servers would flip the switch to disable "quote-tweet".
Something else should be done.
@drq @mittorn @skobkin
You complain about already getting offshoot threads, many people asking/saying similar things, wanting to reply to all of them, and you want to solve that in-place right?
Within a thread: mention them in the _reply_ to the original post to (hopefully) redirect them to a different branch for a discussion.
Outside thread: dedicated post, literal offshoot thread, which I'm guessing is not what you want.