|
Top-level
@davidaugust @sirsean @Gargron This is exactly my opinion on this: ok to add it, but with an opt-in option, best should be a granular opt-in. Coming from TW like many of us recently, I'm pretty convinced this functionality is one of ways to hell when it is used badly. 6 comments
 @davidaugust @Gargron @abies77 @sirsean This. You never know how people run away with a toot. It can be fun, it can also be toxic. I rarely miss it. I like it non-toxic. So definitely opt-in, if at all. I don't see how one could retract once fired, other than by deleting the toot. Also, I think the higher demand is skewed by the latest wave of refugees from the birdsite. Lots of multifollower journalists and influencers. Eager to rebuild multifollower again. By quoting. Nah. Don't wanna. @RolfBly @davidaugust @Gargron @sirsean I do agree. Deletion is clearly your only option when something really toxic happens with your post. It would definitely be fine for me too not having this new option.  @ElleGray @davidaugust @Gargron @abies77 @sirsean Yes. Although I have to add, there are also a few journalists I would really miss if the birdsite disappears & they wouldn't migrate here. One should never generalise.. |
Gregory's Server
@Gargron @abies77 @sirsean
I agree. Quote tweets very often have been and are used in ways that increase harassment and decrease safety.
That doesn’t mean something better can’t be built, but getting it right, and giving users a lot of intuitive control over how their content ends up, sounds good. And an opt-in seems like it’d help.