The debate about QTs is interesting because as far as I tell, all sides are correct.
• QTs let you introduce a topic to your followers w/ tailored commentary (Black Twitter is the best at this)
• They bring fame & attention to the worst people in the world
• They cause dogpiles
• They’re a great format for humor, which 🦣 needs more of
• They are often performative dunking “look at this loser”
• They let you address a side issue or add a different perspective w/o derailing the primary convo
@sbarolo when privileged people say "quote tweets made twitter nastier" they gloss over how many times "nastier" meant "exposed me to discomfort".
It doesn't always mean that, of course. But many people on mastodon are pathological about being comfortable.
What made twitter powerful and meaningful was the energy it brought to social change by exposing people to new and sometimes uncomfortable ideas. If mastodon wants to stay nice over everything, it will never serve as a public forum
I'm open to uncomfortable ideas and Mastodon will absolutely provide / has absolutely provided such as this one.
Just with less hate.
Less hate mainly because there's no incentive to induce rage.
@shrewshrew @sbarolo seems another aspect of mastodon I'm getting used to is seeing a toot and not recognising it's part of a thread.
My apologies for not checking the context of your comment.
I do miss QT but as been mentioned it's a double edged sword.
@sbarolo But how can I virtue signal unless I can QT someone else’s great post and say “This 👇🏽”?
(BTW, I agree with all your above posts.)
@sbarolo I'm hoping that if it does come to Mastodon (hopefully w/ the ability to disable it on your account and per post) then the fact that the servers aren't actively PROMOTING and pushing fights will mean it just won't be the same tool for dogpiling it became on twitter.
Twitter is built from the ground up to let me know who the "hated main character" of the day is, from the second I log on. Mastodon doesn't have that, so far.
@sbarolo I think yes, but the OP needs to know they’ve been QT, be able to restrict if they want to be QTd/know about it
Otherwise it’s gonna lead to more screenshot post which I don’t like.
I like QT as a way of referencing especially when doing SoMe journal clubs etc
Yes. I’m firmly in favor of weighting control in favor of the person whose post is being shared and discussed.
"They let you address a side issue or add a different perspective w/o derailing the primary convo"
Isn't that just learning to use threading? And a UI issue? Since the official Twitter client does such a poor job of displaying and interacting with threads, people aren't used to them. The client I use here, fedilab, displays the threads, but doesn't let you fold them. Ideally, if there were a subthread you don't care about, you would simply hide it. Even better, ignore it completely.
@sbarolo for your first point:
"QTs let you introduce a topic to your followers w/ tailored commentary (Black Twitter is the best at this)"
I don't think I know / understand what you are talking about. Do you have an example?
I'm one of those who has seen quotes used mostly in a positive way, but I can see that some communities have seen it used in mostly negative ways, so I understand it's a difficult question.
But I've seen interesting ideas in the other discussion, like making it opt-in/ opt-out if you want your toots quoted or not.
Or add a preview function for links to other toots.
Would that be a compromise that could work for those who had a negative experience with quotes?
@DrPsyBuffy @sbarolo @warkittens
I think it's a little bizarre that this argument has taken over this site. It's not well advertised, but quite a few instances have the feature, and I guess it should be better advertised up front as people are picking instances. This one has it, and I haven't even used it, nor have I really ever seen anyone in it using it regularly.
@Wikisteff @warkittens @sbarolo
same with #PublicSafety messaging in an Emergency/Disaster. It's important to be able to spin off different threads on different aspects without getting everything mussed up in one thread.
In the fourth episode of our investigative series based on an extensive array of internal Facebook documents, we explore the fallout of a major algorithm change the company made in 2018. The documents outline how an emphasis on engagement incentivized the spread of divisive, sensational content and misinformation. WSJ's Keach Hagey and Jeff Horwitz explain how attempts from within the company to undo some of the damage were often thwarted.
There's a fairly new Wikipedia article aiming to summarise journalism+research on rage farming: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rage_farming
@sbarolo I think I'm not alone in the opinion that it should be implemented BUT with restrictions configurable by the user:
[ ] Restrict to public posts
[ ] Allow followers
[ ] require manual authorization
[ ] Allow follows
[ ] require manual authorization
[ ] Allow mutuals
[ ] require manual authorization
This would save us a lot of headaches.
@sbarolo They also let you join threads of different conversations together. That's the biggest use case I've run into; not just connecting people but connecting ideas.
What's fascinating to me is that mastodon will "onebox" off-platform content but not on-platform content — making itself actually a second-class citizen of its own features.
@sbarolo Yes. If the pros and cons were less evenly distributed there wouldn’t be as much debate.
I find them useful, myself, but not vital to how I use social media. The discussion has been useful.
Precisely stated.
Folk with larger followings can trigger their gang.
Imvho a normal reply below and a reblog of the post is still likely to be seen by your people but you run the risk of publicising more clearly your opponent's view ... tends to make you think before you post.
Gene!
Scott Barolo
Cleo of Topless Topics
Scot Hacker
shrewshrew
Kevin كيفين Pluck
Steve Gisselbrecht
Kasia 
Monica Di, PhD 
Drew Tipson
Janet
RDS (shawphd on Twitter)
Jane is an Addiction 🏳️⚧️💜👭🇮🇸
Marcelo Magallon
shambolic affair
Verzopft und verkopft
Dani — MLT(ASCP)
Buffy the Psych Prof
Dr. J Bernadette Moore
A Concerned Scientist
Steffen Christensen
Scott M. 
Karen Leick
Boud
Cyber Yuki
Patty Bluebird 🦩
Grant Gould
Riley S. Faelan
smeg
Loukas (They/Them) 🏳️⚧️
Kuba Orlik
Scott
Jeff Bishop
StevenHammal
Michael K Johnson
RobertJackson