Gregory's ServerI 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.
  @Gargron I hope you don't add it, but if you do, at least give us the option to block quoted posts from people, please. @twit_terrorist @Gargron That, and the option to block my posts (individually) from being quoted. @jurjen_heeck @twit_terrorist @Gargron yeah, they said they're probably going to make it so that you fan opt out of being quote booated (QBed?) Maybe Quote Boosts can be integrated with existing Boost functionality and APIs, and the choices given to the user can be extended from just "Show Boosts" and "Hide Boosts" to also include "Hide Boosts with Commentary"? (I love that these are global and per-followee options.) @twit_terrorist @Gargron I could think of a few options to mitigate the unwanted effects: @Gargron I would love it. I miss it when I want to point out a toot and when I feel the need to add something to it why I want to point that toot out. @Gargron You could just make the feature opt-in, so admins have to enable it in their dashboard before their users can quote anyone.
I respect the anti-harassment stance, but fedi doesn't need quotes to harass as I'm sure you know. @Gargron Copy Paste works for me... a twitter clone is not where we should be headed...  @Gargron Not sure how to feel about this. Depends how people will end up using it. @Gargron You're never going to make everyone happy. I'm happy with Mastodon either way. Keep up the good work  @Gargron  @Gargron please consider the idea of giving consent to be quote tweeted. Thanks for all the hard work and happy new year.  @Gargron 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. @Gargron 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.
[DATA EXPUNGED]
  @Gargron They are just links with good previews. Instead of creating a separate concept for it, make link previews work better! https://scott.mn/2022/12/30/quote_toot_is_link/  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. @davidaugust @Gargron maybe an account wide option? like disable for all posts. idk i think i prefer a case by case basis  @sirsean @Gargron while technically vastly different, both account-wide and granular control are possible. One could even theoretically build the feature to only apply for certain hastags. The bigger issue is do users have to opt-out of it, or opt-in to it. Most people use default, so an opt-in would mean most would be like they are now. An opt-out would mean most would not be like things are now. Adding it as an option one can _opt-in_ to seems a solid option to me. @Gargron exactly what i was thinking! opt out makes quote tweeting more viable. @myownpetard @Gargron or require the feature be opted into. Default settings often end up deciding what people do for them. Most users do not opt-out of things in many contexts.
[DATA EXPUNGED]
 @Gargron 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  @Gargron 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. @Gargron and I would have them turned off for my posts to not be quote-posted… I like the thread convo…   @apLundell @Gargron yeah. opt in IF you want it able to be done to your posts. not another thing people need to know about to sort, hunt and set... @Gargron I've already heard people in here talking about ways to attract advertisers... OMG...
[DATA EXPUNGED]
 @Gargron 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  @Gargron @Gargron In that case: also the ability to turn on a notification if toots are quotes.  @Gargron 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.
[DATA EXPUNGED]
@Gargron 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... @Gargron Yet ANOTHER feature #Mastodon has over #Twitter_Exit @Gargron Thank you for considering this. Please consider taking a look at this Fediverse Enhancement Proposal for an existing standard on how quote posts are implemented: https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/t/fep-e232-object-links/2722 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 @davidaugust @Gargron Hard disagree. Toxicity is already here. Reducing accessibility, reducing attribution, making it easier for people to misrepresent each other with no native paper trail, and taking away *any* communication functionality is not how you foster a real debate. Animosity is fine. Animosity is necessary to challenge complacency and deception. Friction is a bellwether. This can done better than Twitter, safely, with more controls, but it should be done. This thread is not about taking something away. It is about adding a feature that research showed on Twitter increased contentious interactions: quote tweets. Adding quote boosts is likely to increase toxicity and quote re-share features tend to do that on all platforms. Boosts do not reduce attribution now, they literally re-share the OP's post. Without _significant_ resources to study new quote re-shares, the interface will likely collapse into quote tweets. Plus, quote boosts dis-intergate if one quote shares a toot from a user or instance federated from one's own instance. And The current ActivityPub spec (the foundation for social media interaction far beyond Mastodon too) may not support quote shares in a way that keeps moderation controls intact, or in fact a quoted toot intact with the comment on it.  @Gargron 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. @lydiaconwell @Gargron Yeah it is something that occurred to me after posting that. I was only thinking about the people who are quoted by people so that their bad actor followers can mob them, as is pretty common in the fowl place. But yeah, it can also be used to make it harder to draw attention to abusive posts. It's a complicated feature, and the real question is if the lack of quoting really stopped the mobbing in the first place, as we don't have any data on that except our gut feelings.  @Gargron 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. @gargron 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…’ @RevMike 
[DATA EXPUNGED]
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. @Gargron 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.  @Gargron The thing I like most about it is that often you get so much more useful context in a QT  @Gargron 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. @Gargron Have y'all done user research on a feature before? What metrics do you track for decision making? Do you share that data publicly? @Gargron 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.)  @Gargron I like the idea of opt in/opt out quote posts. It keeps the original poster in charge, while allowing the option of nuanced discussion.  @Gargron 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.
[DATA EXPUNGED]
@Gargron love that you’re considering this and giving users more agency over how their content is consumed and shared at the same time. @Gargron cheers, a good move IMO. Usually I want to add some context to posts before sharing; and the lack of quotes makes me boost less and share less make the quote text appended in the original thread too, like pingbacks in the blog, let the OP feel welcome to chime-in the outside group convo(s), it can make the whole attitude around #QT more inclusionary than exclusionary like in #twitter (which make it toxic) we should improve #QT in #mastodon, not just copying blindly from twitter @Gargron 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?
[DATA EXPUNGED]
 @Gargron 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 :-\  @Gargron 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.  @Gargron @Gargron 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. @Gargron 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. @Gargron 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. @Gargron Please don't, this lovely place would likely turn into another rage-inducing hell like Twitter.  @Gargron 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.  @Gargron ...make the ability to be QT'ed an opt-in feature, granular? Never, Always, or Selected (Follows, Followers, As Hoc)?  @Gargron 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. @Gargron 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.  @Gargron please make sure we can opt-out from reading them too (just like we can hide boosts from certain people). @Gargron 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. @Gargron I’d personally rather not see it. I feel like the lack of quote posts has helped shape the friendliness of Mastodon when compared to Twitter. quote posts are here already on the most clients, if you link a toot, it will show all the content in the preview card. so there is not a lot of a difference, expect missing notifications.  @Gargron 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. @Gargron 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. @Gargron I am incredibly against them as they breed toxicity and just act as a way to try and put people out of context to your audience  by coincidence, I just wrote a blog post yesterday analysing some of the most popular arguments for QTs. Maybe this is of interest. @Gargron I see both sides. I think it has a lot of negative effects but I do miss commenting on things I share that aren't dunky/flamey. @Gargron 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. |
@Gargron Thank you.