Annalee Newitz 🍜Let me put a phrase into your mind: nonconsensual virality. It's why quote-posts on Twitter led to harassment. People's words stolen, taken out of context, used purely to incite a mob of griefers. The answer is to give #Mastodon users control over whether someone else can quote-post them, with a simple "quote or not" setting that can be set before or after the post goes up. We should be allowed to stop people from taking our posts viral without our consent.
nick woods@annaleen can't someone nonconsensually viralate you with screenshoots, though? i like the idea of mastodon users controlling whether they can be quote-posted but i'm not sure it would do much to solve this problem
Zane Selvans@ZaneSelvans @bro I think that friction is the point. Make it slightly harder, and you can cut down on the easy drive-by mobbing. But we still need good moderation to solve the bigger problems of abuse.
@annaleen For sure! The right amount of friction where we want it, when we want it can radically reshape how the platform works. I feel like I've seen a surprising number of posts pointing out that something is already possible in theory (with a lot of friction) as if that means providing the option of making it easy is pointless.
Rachael L@annaleen @ZaneSelvans @bro the fact that you would have to do so much work to violate someone’s consent also makes it a lot more obvious to others viewing the viral post that it was probably not with their consent. I rarely blocked on twitter (preferred muting since they don’t know they’re muted) but obvious non-consensual screenshot tweets got block and report. but it was hard to know for sure. :(
@r343l @annaleen @bro And I would imagine that this interpretation is also really context dependent -- like a small account screenshotting something from a big account / powerful person to hold them accountable or avoid their wrath is totally different from a big account screenshotting a nobody and punching down.
Stainless Steel Raziel@r343l @annaleen @ZaneSelvans @bro
I'm all for not having QTs at all, or failing that, giving the poster control over whether their posts can be QTd.
It will definitely reduce drive-bys and casual bad actors,
*however* I'm completely unconvinced this will deter determined bad actors and their mobs, which are the real problem on the birdsite and elsewhere.
I'm all for not having QTs at all, or failing that, giving the poster control over whether their posts can be QTd.
It will definitely reduce drive-bys and casual bad actors,
*however* I'm completely unconvinced this will deter determined bad actors and their mobs, which are the real problem on the birdsite and elsewhere.
ErcanbrackOk, I can go with the argument of “Friction as deterrence”.