Quinta Jurecicabsence of QT function makes covering news events here really difficult, fwiw
FilmWonkManual QTs are possible (by clicking the three-dot menu and copying the link to the post), but the platform actively discourages it to avoid becoming a place of dunking.
Wurstsemmel 🕊🇺🇦 #SlavaUkraïniI never said it was identical to a QT, but the decision to avoid QTs was clearly a deliberate one. It makes things less convenient for journalists, granted, but so does a timeline that just shows posts in the order they were posted, and that was also clearly a deliberate design choice.
Do you have a substantive argument for why QTs should exist here?
@FilmWonk Just look around this thread for arguments?
And if I may ask - what's your argument for not having the feature?
Because QTs encourage talking past or about someone to your audience, rather than engaging with the conversation at hand.
Much like you're doing right now, even without that feature to encourage you.
I'm not making your argument for you. What do you think QTs are primarily used for on Twitter, and do you think that's a good feature or a bad one? Make your case. Or don't.
@FilmWonk Not exactly "talking past", as you will be notified. Just like you will be (maybe) if I copy all of your content and re-use it in my own toot.
There's this very basic principle in database design that if you can explicitly reference something that already exists, you do it. And then if you do that, you can make things super-comfortable for people if you let them see at first glance what the referenced content is. That is a QT. 🤷♂️
Mastodon is really bad at "embedding".
@FilmWonk This is really just about Usability. The whole point of people complaining is probably that Mastodon acts so poorly in providing inline content previews.
If whenever someone uses a toot-URL (or some other external URL) in a toot, a proper preview of the destination was shown, that is basically the same functionality which I think is missing.
It's really basic.
@FilmWonk It's about convenience, and also it can look pretty, and also it can help contextualizing or commenting on pure bullshit propaganda or disinformation (early).
See e.g. the "Truth Sandwich" concept.
If Mastodon grows, this will inavoidably be needed here as well, as everywhere else, I believe. Things may have been different in the past, but if Mastodon grows, these things will become important here as well.
I'd say with respect to previews, I agree with you. You link to a post, some preview version of that post should appear in your post.
With respect to notifying the person, I think I'm on board with forcing that to be an active rather than a passive choice.
It's the difference between the platform saying, "Someone is talking about you", which you may or may not want to be a part of, vs. "Someone is talking to you", which you can meet with a response (even if it's a mute/block).
I sympathize with Quinta's complaint above, but it's not as if journalists and commentators writ large are immune to the tendency to dunk on stories rather than add to them. They just compartmentalize. If it's their beat, they talk about it. If it's not their beat, they're just like anyone else on Twitter, offering a hot take. And hot takes don't need to create a relationship with the original author, IMO.
@FilmWonk So you're basically agreeing to my major points. And many of the other people making that same point very early on in their Mastodon experience, again and again (I also have).
Like the original author in this thread here, likely. Same reasons, I assume.
Sorry to assume you were more trolling than trying to discuss. 👍🤷♂️
I prefer a sensible argument, but Twitter (unfortunately) has kind of burned me.
But I don't think that "proper" Quote-Tooting was the reason.
@wurstsemmel Quite alright. I wasn't trolling, and there was definitely a moment there where I thought you were too :)
I'm with you that being on Twitter makes that both an easy and frequently correct assumption.
I don't think QTing is the sole cause of that sort of toxicity on Twitter, but I do tend to agree with the Mastodude that it's a nudge in that direction. Makes a few more people do it than would otherwise, and makes those so inclined able to do it more easily.
Thanks for chatting!
@FilmWonk I just believe it adds much more to the user experience than it would ever take away from the general culture.
Let me be honest: If culture ever breaks down here, it will be because of bad people - and not because of improved Usability or some very basic feature.
In terms of Usability, there is a lot to learn from (e.g.) Twitter, and folks best take that opportunity before it is lost.
Jeff Fecke@wurstsemmel @FilmWonk Agreed. People will find ways to QRT even if there's friction. If all else fails, we'll go back to the old Twitter RT @ model.
Mr Smith@FilmWonk @wurstsemmel Here’s what @Gargron had to say, back in early 2018: “I'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”
@mrsmith @FilmWonk @Gargron But, with all due respect, "performatively", that makes no sense - because:
Lacking any kind of algorithm for timeline content selection (except for chronological sorting), ANY of that content shows up in my feed ANYWAY.
The sole difference is: Does it show up WITH or WITHOUT CONTEXT.
And all I'm saying is: I prefer it to show up WITH CONTEXT, to the maximum extent it can sensibly be retrieved and visualized.
@mrsmith @FilmWonk @Gargron Same, while we're at it, holds true for the fact that while I am writing a post here I can not just scroll up and at least review the post I am responding to. That helps in making arguments, and it's missing. It's very basic Usability. You just need that option, and it's not there.
I really like this environment (in principle), but I think that no-brainer opportunities to make things more usable obviously should be grabbed.
@mrsmith @FilmWonk @Gargron Like, if I shift my hate to a new, separate context with a Twitter-style quote-toot (for just my own bubble to see), I am more toxic than if I just spew my hatred into the comments section of the original toot author (for everyone to see)?
Not sure how that makes sense and went unchallenged. Sorry. 🤷♂️
As I have said earlier: This is really all about Usability, and how the ability to contextualize speech acts works.
@wurstsemmel @FilmWonk @Gargron
Context is good, of course, but then it raises the question of who provides that context.
If I QRT you and the context I choose to provide is “ha ha ha worst opinion ever”, then that’s not helpful particularly if I have influence on the platform? Or am I oversimplifying?
Out of curiosity, is the lack of algorithm on here so serious that you’d stop using mastodon in favour of Twitter or others? I’m not picking a fight here - I’m just curious what works for you?
@mrsmith @FilmWonk @Gargron "Haha worst opinion" just happens. That's life. NOTHING can save me from that, anywhere. Come more humans, come more bad people. Ignoring basic Communications or Usability features does not heal that. It happens in the streets you walk. It's human nature/weakness. 🤷♂️
You don't make it go away with poor UX.
As far as the algorithm is concerned: I'd like to keep my opinion out of the discussion here, please. It's a whole different story.
@wurstsemmel @[email protected]
I agree - it’s a tough world, but I’ve found a lot of positivity on here, so this is where I’m living at the moment. I call in to Twitter occasionally, and then I catch myself getting angry about something I didn’t even care about.
Then I come back to mastodon and laugh at Musk and how stupid it all is! And I’m calm again and I can talk to people who want to make the world better.
@mrsmith Completely agree. 🤷♂️