Eugen RochkoI've made a deliberate choice against a quoting feature because it inevitably adds toxicity to people's behaviours. You are tempted to quote when you should be replying, and so you speak at your audience instead of with the person you are talking to. It becomes performative. Even when doing it for "good" like ridiculing awful comments, you are giving awful comments more eyeballs that way. No quote toots. Thank's
I was just answering a question that multiple new people asked me, it's not like I *just* made the decision. Didn't expect this toot to blow up of all things haha. This has been my position since that feature was requested for the first time more than a year ago
Joene 🏴@Gargron 1. Is this your individual opinion or do other developers also agree on this? Sounds like something the dev-team should at least agree on, otherwise the community should.
2. There are two different approaches to quoted tweets.
One is the one you describing, people harassing others using this feature.
But the other approach is not toxic. It's the way people use quoted retweets with news tweets and public (e.g. political) figures. People who want to tell their followers what they think about the tweet they quoted. If they reply under the tweet, it will be difficult to find, also for their followers. Quoted retweets/post also appear on the default user timeline.
💡 Therefore I advise to create a opt-in quoted posts feature. With a text like: 'are you a news outlet or a public figure, offer your followers the option to quote your posts.
grischa@joenepraat
I absolutely agree in what @Gargron says, but to answer your first question: This is a platform decision not a fediverse decision. If you disagree with that decision, you are free to choose another platform like Hubzilla i.e. There is no boosting but quoting only.
And as it still is the fediverse, all this platforms communicate with each other.
In the fediverse you are not only not bound to instances, but also not to platforms and coders decisions. :)
I absolutely agree in what @Gargron says, but to answer your first question: This is a platform decision not a fediverse decision. If you disagree with that decision, you are free to choose another platform like Hubzilla i.e. There is no boosting but quoting only.
And as it still is the fediverse, all this platforms communicate with each other.
In the fediverse you are not only not bound to instances, but also not to platforms and coders decisions. :)
@grischa The way you say this doesn't come over very nice. 'If you don't like it, go somewhere else.' That is what I get from your reply. I'm not a developer, but a long time Mastodon (and even Hubzilla) server owner and translator. So I'm completely aware about the Fediverse. You don't need to lecture me about that.
I was only asking if this was something @Gargron decided on his own or that the developer team decided it collectively.
@joenepraat
Sorry, I didn't meant to sound rude. English is not my mother toungue. I only wanted to point at the fact, that there are more options if you don't like something (and that this is something good!). :)
But if you know Hubzilla that well I don't understand your first question? Mikes decision on boosts and quotes was different and he explained that, too.
@Gargron
Sorry, I didn't meant to sound rude. English is not my mother toungue. I only wanted to point at the fact, that there are more options if you don't like something (and that this is something good!). :)
But if you know Hubzilla that well I don't understand your first question? Mikes decision on boosts and quotes was different and he explained that, too.
@Gargron
Will Ross@joenepraat @grischa @Gargron FWIW, English IS my mother tongue, and the reply seemed sincere and helpful to me.
Especially as I'm new here, stumbling around wide eyed, trying to hoover up the new concepts.