Aral BalkanWhen you post things on Instagram, Facebook, and X, this is what they look like to people who don’t use those platforms.
Frederik Elwert@aral This also seems to be a thing on Bsky, although there it’s opt-in. Which means that people actively decide to exclude people not on the same platform. Seems to be considered a feature, not a bug. 🤷
Krazov@felwert @aral On Mastodon, you can make a post "only for followers," and we're fine with it. I can imagine that a user can decide on his personal level not to share their post with the open web. That's their choice.
(Though, the funny part is that it's more like a flag, and respecting it depends completely on the app, so if there is more traction for Bluesky, apps going around that might start popping up. Same for blocks.)
@felwert @aral Seen alone, perhaps. The scenario I can see is this: they block people on Bluesky and by making their posts BS-only, they make sure that blockers cannot simply open a private tab and read them. A lot of visibility aspects on Mastodon were driven by these situations, too. That Bluesky allows only such a solution is not their fault.
mathew
Paul Martin@[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] It can get a little frustrating if you follow only one person in the thread of replies. You only see one side of the conversation.
@nowster @felwert @aral Alas, that's unavoidable. And Fedi is sometimes worse; if you happen to be on an instance defederated from some of the discussants, you have those empty spots. What Twitter got nice at some point, was showing placeholders for messages that you cannot see, either due to being blocked, blocking, muting, the message being behind the lock, or simply deleted. At least there was a visual cue.
Yenn dc ☂️Just to make it explicit — there really is a huge difference between the POSTER deciding to require an account to view their posts, and the PLATFORM deciding people need an account to view "public" posts…