I see that @[email protected] has made it to Mastodon. I have suspended it from religion.masto.host, and will suspend any other content scraping bots I become aware of.

Thread readers scrape content without the consent of the creator, move it to a website outside of the creator's control, and sometimes monetise it, as discussed here:

https://twitter.com/erynnbrook/status/1099086911463800832

Erynn Brook on Twitter

“Why I don’t like thread compilers: a thread. Please do not compile. I’ve blocked threadreaderapp and it won’t store my threads.”

Twitter

@amv In case others agree with this take, is there a way a "thread-unrolling" bot would look appropriate to folks? For example if the content was ephemeral and the site ran no ads?

Many people used the bot on the birdsite not because they wanted to exploit creators, but because they found it genuinely useful. I'd love to see discussion of how those useful features can be baked into the #fediverse in a consensual, friendly way.

@astrojuanlu Yeah, I understand that why those tools are attractive. Ephemerality and a clear commitment to non-monetisation would help, but the real problem is lack of consent.

@amv I see. Perhaps a more complex logic of "someone requested your post to be unrolled, click ✔️ to accept, or consider posting a long-text version in a more readable format".

Not nearly as effective, but at least, as you say, is consent-first while also nudging people to go back to good ol' blogging :)

@astrojuanlu Yes, I think something like that--with the unroll only available for a fixed period of time, on a noncommercial platform--would work for me.
@amv @astrojuanlu is ephemeral a hard requirement? That would mean more unrolls are needed every time someone wants to read it. But a delete call by the author would definitely needed, to revoke given consent. Just fiddling with ideas.