I don't feel as strongly about quote posts as I did in 2018. Personally, I am not a fan, but there is clearly a lot of demand for it. We're considering it.
@Gargron I hope you don't add it, but if you do, at least give us the option to block quoted posts from people, please.
@twit_terrorist @Gargron That, and the option to block my posts (individually) from being quoted.

@jurjen_heeck @twit_terrorist @Gargron

One can simply link to a post, but the nicely formatted graph data doesn't display. I don't see the difference in linking to URL or quote posting. I think if you post something to a public website, others should be able to interact with that post. Turning off comments, muting, blocking are legit methods to control your personal experience, but pre-editorializing who can link to a public post I think goes too far.
https://elk.zone/mastodon.nl/@jurjen_heeck/109623908803719520

Elk

@awarsing @jurjen_heeck @twit_terrorist @Gargron the difference is the immediate visibility of the content combined with, often as seen on Twitter, a call to pile-on or otherwise disparage the original post / author.

We see this happening a LOT on Twitter. We really don’t need to add routes for bullying and abuse here.

@jurjen_heeck @wiredfire @awarsing @twit_terrorist @Gargron boosting gives it the same visibility. It’s not the features that are toxic, people are toxic, regardless of the features. I miss qrt a lot. I don’t want to be a mere booster, just an amplifier. I want to ad my vision and my context to it. I’m using link to the toot, and my comment. I’m very sorry that you had such a terrible timeline on the other side, with such horrible qrt. It was very different from my own experience.

@jonasnuts @jurjen_heeck @awarsing @twit_terrorist @Gargron You’re right, people are toxic not features but people use features and we ignore that at our peril.

You don’t have to be just a booster. Start your own conversation based on something you’ve seen! It takes fractionally more effort and is massively more valuable to the community.

@wiredfire @jonasnuts @jurjen_heeck @awarsing @twit_terrorist @Gargron UX and UI design is about the consequences of our decisions. If a design choice has unintended consequences, that is on the designer, not the user. You can encourage and discourage all sorts of behaviour through design. This is similar to saying "guns don't kill people, people do". If the tool makes a task easier, the task will be repeated more often.
@mdstevens0612 I can see your point, but the difference from a feature to a gun, is that the “target” has de ability to control the bullet. You can choose witch bullets you take, witch bullets you dodge:-) @wiredfire @jurjen_heeck @awarsing @twit_terrorist @Gargron
@jonasnuts @mdstevens0612 @wiredfire @jurjen_heeck @awarsing @twit_terrorist @Gargron I'm not sure of this. It is extremely hard for people not to respond when attacked and harder still not to feel some pain. I don't think blocking someone after the fact is, to return to the metaphor, dodging or blocking the bullets.
@MarvinFreeman I suppose it is something that’s easier for some, and something you gain and train with experience. I don’t believe in freedom without responsibility. You are advocating for a sterile environment, where some entity above us all decides what is safe and what it’s not, even if we have the tools to do it ourselves. But, this is fediverse, right? Every instance can decide. @mdstevens0612 @wiredfire @jurjen_heeck @awarsing @twit_terrorist @Gargron