On the "quote tweet" debate:
QT is one of several decisions that made Twitter into a place where powerful or 'influential' people post, and most of the other posts are reactions to that material – agreement, dunks, critiques, jokes, etc.
Even if people didn't always use it for that themselves, it was part of creating the overall feeling that there is one big topic under discussion at any given time – and so of course you add your opinion on that topic.
Not having QT also encourages replies!
Thinking about it more from all the replies here, I reckon it boils down to this:
"Boosting" on Mastodon encourages you to only boost posts you want to spread – look, they've even named it to make that obvious!
Quote-tweeting encourages you to spread bad or even hateful posts in order to add your 'reply' (or dunk attempt). So bad posts proliferate...
Most 'neutral' quote tweets, like "this thread is worth your time", add nothing compared to just boosting. If you have something to add, reply!
@tomw @barsteward You make a really interesting point that people quote tweeting with their own comments can help contextualise an issue. However I think there are ways to do that without quote tweeting. For instance, in the reply itself, and/or in your own post describing the issue.
I’ve purposely tried to frame this reply so that it works as a standalone post as an example. The extra characters on Mastodon make that more viable than on Twitter!
@tomw : I do miss being able to boost another's post with your added personal endorsement or information.
At least you still can do that by copying/pasting the OPs post into your own -- via clicking on the post timestamp. (Just as you could on Twitter.)
@tom7p Yeah, or the nightmarish pattern where people get a reply, quote-tweet it with their reply, get another reply, quote-tweet that with their reply, and so on.
I think they usually do know that they could just reply, but they want everyone to see their great replies dunking on this person.
* Without QT, I can't explain why people should read the reboosted thread
* Without QT, I can't help others decide whether they *want* to actually read it.
* Without QT, I can't give people the chance to read a short summary instead of the full thread
* QT is personal. Reboost is impersonal.
* I'd argue that reboost does MORE to concentrate focus on individuals and specific posts than QT. More focus on strangers' views than your friends' views.
@nafnlaus Longer does not mean more informative.
(I could do 100 posts on the above thought if you'd like, but I think you get the idea.)
@tomw I'm sorry, but the amount of information you can express IS highly limited by length. If I want to, say, post a thread about where #lithium comes from, from start to its ultimate incorporation into li-ion batteries, that's just not going to fit in 500 characters.
Heck, the above paragraph alone was 230 characters!
@tomw If a person doesn't care, why make them have to wade through a long thread?
And I've *never* seen quote tweets used in the way you portray. It's always the person's take. The person *you follow, and thus appreciate*'s take.
Thanks for the interesting back and forth. Both POVs I agree with.
However the majority use of QT that I have seen is still "take comment out of context and say it is bad".
It means if you make a joke then people will assume you're sincere and that's not good with how heated things get.
@nafnlaus @tomw
Here is the example that is fresh in my mind from someone I personally respect greatly, but who got it super wrong.
What I saw
https://mobile.twitter.com/Joannechocolat/status/1592549226948755460
When I clicked through
https://mobile.twitter.com/John_Attridge
Perhaps Ms Harris is in on the joke despite appearing not to be? Her followers mostly aren't. Even in this clearcut case we're relying on 110k people to get it right. I block people who do this maliciously so don't have further examples.
Just came across this:
"The quote tweet manufactured the concept of a Twitter “main character”; a person so wrong that everyone in the world would quickly know of it."
And of course... Trump.
https://www.pwnallthethings.com/p/twitter-was-special-but-its-time
@Homebrewandhacking @tomw How is reboost any different than quote tweet with regard to creating a "main character"?
The problem is that Twitter's algo amplifies controversy. The more people are interacting with something, the more likely it is to show it to others. *That's* what creates the notion of a #Twitter "main character" and should be avoided.
Twitter's ***algo*** is basically, "Hey, there's a fight going on here, and we think you may want to take part!"
@wooliex The feeling of a shared moment, you mean?
It was memorable... I'm not sure it was healthy though. Mass global fixation on what was usually some trivia or 'bad tweet'.
@wooliex Well yes, that is the general direction of a lot of the "I'm not moving to Mastodon" tweets on Twitter as well.
I'm not saying something so daft here as "jokes are unhealthy", if you were taking that as a list of "unhealthy" things. What is unhealthy is the Twitter culture of thousands of people making the *same* joke about the *same* thing at the *same* time often in response to the *same* original tweet.
@tomw urgh I remember getting quote tweeted out-of-context by a huge alt right celebrity back in 2016 and getting dogpiled for days by his minions.
I respect that some people use it for good or whatever but I don't miss it lol
Tom Walker
anitahowarth
barsteward
Ellie Elliott
Sarah Marie Nicolosi
Ima B. Me Ⓥ ☑️ (W)
James Barham
katejjeffery
Darien Graham-Smith
Nafnlaus 🇮🇸 🇺🇦
Tom Pearson
MarkScrivens
Ed Freyfogle
PJ "Vote Green" Coffey
woolie
Tealcisgod04♾️