hannah aubryRE: https://social.coop/@scottjenson/116352522288234148
The views expressed by Scott in this thread do not reflect the opinions of the Mastodon core team or organisation. We're addressing this internally. I'm sorry everyone
Lutin Discret@haubles can you sum it up? The thread is now so long i don't know what you are talking about
Troed SångbergScott found it problematic that some people on Mastodon pour hate in people's mentions instead of using block/mute.
The ones who want to pour hate didn't like that.
Patrick H. Lauke@troed @lutindiscret @haubles i particularly enjoyed the take about the entirety of fedi being a #monoculture because of low/no engagement with a specific type of post (on which instance? who knows) compared to the bastion of big tent diversity that are threads and bluesky...
Stephen Bannasch (316 ppm)Lots of folks tried to point out why this didn’t actually make sense, I know I did, it seemed he got himself into a very reactive place emotionally and wasn’t able to understand other perspectives that were being shared.
@stepheneb tbf he became the receiver of exactly the problem he brought up. Pure hatred, voiced out. I'd even claim @Gargron participated with the "puppy killing".
I don’t think that was the initial problem he “thought” he was bringing up. But it sure seemed to become one for him.
And then seemed to be incapable of not digging a deeper and deeper hole.
That’s the part that makes me think he got lost in an emotional whirlpool which sometimes seems to make people think digging in deeper is going to somehow get them to a light at the end of a tunnel.
He indeed intended for the discussion to be around people who go spew hate at others instead of just blocking/muting what they don't like - it's not the first post along those lines.
The AI-haters on Mastodon just couldn't stand that _that_ was the example given - and so they proved Scott's point beyond a shadow of a doubt.
Scott Jenson@troed @stepheneb @lutindiscret
The majority of the hate came from people saying I wanted more AI in Mastodon, or I was upset AI wasn't better treated (or whatever) which was exactly NOT what I wanted. I was using AI as an example of intolerance and the discussion became all about AI. (or that "tolerance lets in the nazis")
I'll totally own that my initial post was too vague and made too broad of a point. I'm not going to pretend I was perfect. But if someone started saying you wanted to let nazi's into mastodon, wouldn't you feel compelled to say "uh, no?"
Willem Janssen@scottjenson @troed @stepheneb @lutindiscret I hope you find a UX way to address harassment on Mastodon. It would be very benificial. The AI example was a poor one, as literally everybody knows by now, and it’s a shame if that gets in the way of actual positive change, e.g. for marginalized communities, and ideally imho also for journalists and other asymmetrical or parasocial posters.
(Tl;dr: More minorities and famous people!)
(Tl;dr: More minorities and famous people!)
Glitzersachen@Wlm @scottjenson @troed @stepheneb @lutindiscret
> I hope you find a UX way to address harassment on Mastodon
I take it you weren't there back in usenet days? Because my experience from back then makes me guess that there is no way to address/police harassment "the UX way".
There’s a nasty form of harassment where better architecture could definitely help the community do a better job limiting harassment:
Stephen Bannasch (316 ppm) (@[email protected])
@[email protected] There have been some serious architectural issues that enable harassment which also hides the harassment from others. The details are important but I can only give a flavor (will look for a post that explains it well). Goes something like this: User0 (person about to be harassed) posts. User1 posts racist reply and sets visibility to “followers only”. That actually means followers only plus User0. 1/n @[email protected] @[email protected]
@stepheneb @Wlm @scottjenson @troed @lutindiscret
This might be a problem, right. Doesn't User0 blocking User1 solve the problem?
What would help more is, if I could block users algorithmically, by e..g if there are (peer committee) curated blocking list, which I could just attach to.
Admittedly this increases the steepness of the filtering bubble, but that would be the intended effect.
Yes, User0 can block User1. Here’s some of the nasty things that can still happen.
User0 is upset and complains about harassment — but almost none of their friends and followers ever see the harassing replies. If User0 also wants to warn folks about User1 they have to screenshot and share.
1/3
User1 is a nasty piece of work and their followers are also creeps. For some reason User1’s followers also enjoy also being nasty to User0 and also reply limiting visibility to followers-only.
If I’m a follower of User0 I never see these messages. If User0 doesn’t have a relatively deep understanding of how Mastodon works they can’t even explain.
2/3
Hiding harassment from User0’s community is an important part of this pattern and makes it hard for User0 to get support.
3/3
@stepheneb @Wlm @scottjenson @troed @lutindiscret
If you think so. I don't agree. But then I am perhaps atypical. Normally I don't need community support for handling a-holes.
I also have been blocked by good people for really innocent stuff, so I assume a lot is in the eye of the beholder.
Even and especially bad behavior. I only don't want to have anything to do with those people, therefore I don't pig wrestle.
I am not here for pig wrestling. I am here for entertainment, information, the connection (as limited as it is, but, for example, there is no active Lisp programmer AFAICS in a radius of 100 km).
I’m describing a pattern of harassment that these creeps use against folks they judge as marginal and deserving of abuse just because they exist.
I also think this is important because architectural improvements might help a community of folks improve this.
You may well not be a target.
I’m not a target — and this important to me.