🧵arguing that we should do away with “privacy level” options for reply posts (in case of Mastodon and Mastodon-like Fediverse platforms which follow that model), to eliminate the ability of racists to hide their abuse of black users behind “mentioned users only” replies.

#Fediverse #Mastodon #PostPrivacy

(continues)

reshared this

in reply to Feral Thoughts

reshared this

in reply to Feral Thoughts

Basically, an abuser replies with post privacy level set to “followers only” or “mentioned users only”, and tagging only the victim and the abuser’s followers. The followers of the abuser then pile on, with their own abusive replies, all set to “followers only” or “mentioned users only”.

#Fediverse #Mastodon #PostPrivacy

(continues)

damon reshared this.

in reply to Feral Thoughts

When the victim mentions publicly that they are facing harassment, other Fedi users respond saying that they don’t see any abusive replies, and blame the victim for being too sensitive, or for not correctly using the moderation tools.

#Fediverse #Mastodon #PostPrivacy

(continues)

damon reshared this.

in reply to Feral Thoughts

One technical solution to alleviate this problem would be to force replies to inherit the privacy level of the parent post. If the parent post is “public” or “quiet public”, then the reply also has to be “public” or “quiet public”.

#Fediverse #Mastodon #PostPrivacy

(continues)

damon reshared this.

in reply to Feral Thoughts

To put this differently, only a new post (the original post of a thread) should have the option to select privacy levels. Every single reply in a thread or a sub-thread should simply inherit the privacy level of the original post.

This will cut off the abusers’s ability to create pile ups in reply threads that are invisible to everyone bar the victim and the abusers themselves.

#Fediverse #Mastodon #PostPrivacy

(continues)

damon reshared this.

in reply to Feral Thoughts

I also don’t see any advantage of the present model where each reply post can have a different visibility. If someone wants a different privacy level for their response to some post, they can always write a new post with the desired privacy level, include the link to the post they want to respond to, and tag the relevant users.

#Fediverse #Mastodon #PostPrivacy

(continues)

damon reshared this.

in reply to Feral Thoughts

To be clear: I understand that the racism on Fedi is a larger political problem—it stems from interpenetrating dimensions of colonialism, imperialism, capitalism, and all other forms of exploitation. There isn’t, there cannot be, a technical-only solution to the problem.

My suggestion in this thread will only cut off one particular mode of harassment. But I feel this step is worth taking, as one among many.

#Fediverse #Mastodon #PostPrivacy

damon reshared this.

in reply to Feral Thoughts

reshared this

in reply to Jon

@jdp23 @aj @julian @scottjenson @alexisbushnell @mekkaokereke

Oops, my account is default public, and I am more of a lurker from the global south; so the peculiar dynamics that you are highlighting had never occurred to me - that the followers-only reply to a followers-only post will be visible only to the followers of the responding poster and NOT the followers of the OP.

(continues)

in reply to Feral Thoughts

Yes it really is a horrible user experience. It’s frustrating because Friendica and its successors (Hubzilla, (streams), and Forte) have long supported a model where the OP controls the thread - similar to blogs or Facebook - but Mastodon was modeled more after Twitter so inherited this problem.

The good news is that the changes getting made to enable thread-gating (“only followers can quote/ reply”) and the importance of Threadiverse compatibility both lead to taking a new look at this, and Mastodon’s work on quote posts sets a precedent for doing it with safety in mind.

@feralthoughts @aj @julian @scottjenson @alexisbushnell @mekkaokereke

Feral Thoughts reshared this.

in reply to Jon

@jdp23 @aj @julian @scottjenson @alexisbushnell @mekkaokereke

Yes, I know. And Forte is ActivityPub-based, so other AP-based software should be able to emulate that behaviour.

I think a technical solution to enable this (OP having authority over the entire thread) would be to route all responses through the instance hosting the original poster.

@osma

(continues)

in reply to Feral Thoughts

So... say, user UA on instance A writes a new post. User UB on instance B replies. User UC on instance C replies to UB’s post. User UD replies to UC’s post. UD’s post should reach instances C and B though A (D -> A -> C and D -> A -> B). Same with all other replies.

Of course, this will also give the OP the authority to delete any subsequent post in that thread.

(continues)

This entry was edited (2 months ago)
in reply to Feral Thoughts

@jdp23 @aj @julian @scottjenson @alexisbushnell @mekkaokereke @osma @ricci

I accumulated the scattered points I have made in this thread in a single thread at

union.place/@feralthoughts/115…


🧵 arguing that all responses to a new post (the original post of any thread) and responses to those responses should be routed to all the participants through the instance hosting the original poster (and that all responses should mandatorily inherit the privacy level of the original post, and also mandatorily inherit the “privacy group” of recipients set by the original post).

#Fediverse #Mastodon

(continues)

in reply to Jon

@jdp23 @aj @julian @scottjenson @alexisbushnell @mekkaokereke @osma

As an aside: the need to tag everyone who is already participating in a thread (so that they are notified of one's post) is a major element of the broken user experience.

As it is, there are limited characters available. If there are a lot of participants in a conversation, half the characters are lost in tagging. Another 25-30% in hashtags. Hardly anything is left for the actual text!

(continues)

in reply to Feral Thoughts

@jdp23 @aj @julian @scottjenson @alexisbushnell @mekkaokereke @osma

So people start randomly untagging some recipients. And what we get is silos in sub-threads and sub-sub-threads with neither the OP nor anyone else having track of what’s going on. This design is incredibly poor, in terms of fostering an inclusive participatory conversation.

(continues)

in reply to Feral Thoughts

@jdp23 @aj @julian @scottjenson @alexisbushnell @mekkaokereke @osma

Ideally, every single user who boosts a post in a thread, or replies to some post in a thread, should automatically get notified of every subsequent post in that thread. Of course, so should the OP.

What I suggested in

union.place/@feralthoughts/115…

and

union.place/@feralthoughts/115…

may help achieving this?

(continues)


@jdp23 @aj @julian @scottjenson @alexisbushnell @mekkaokereke

Yes, I know. And Forte is ActivityPub-based, so other AP-based software should be able to emulate that behaviour.

I think a technical solution to enable this (OP having authority over the entire thread) would be to route all responses through the instance hosting the original poster.

@osma

(continues)

in reply to Feral Thoughts

@jdp23 @aj @julian @scottjenson @alexisbushnell @mekkaokereke @osma

What if someone doesn’t want to receive ALL the responses in a thread? For this purpose, I think there should be an option for any user to unsubscribe from the thread.

And the other side of the same coin: any user should be able to subscribe to a public thread of their interest, and get notifications of all subsequent posts in that thread.

in reply to Feral Thoughts

On the latter point, even the simplest implementations of a reply collection would allow the user's home server to notify them of updates in the size and contents of the collection. However, there's a big difference in wanting to see new (direct) replies, and wanting to follow every sub thread.
@feralthoughts @jdp23 @aj @julian @scottjenson @alexisbushnell @mekkaokereke
in reply to Jon

@jdp23 @aj @normative @alexisbushnell @mekkaokereke

As I write these multiple multi-post mini-threads, I keep wishing there was some UI to compose and post these threads in one go.

I hope @scottjenson and his team design this soon. 😃

(The new design of the Mastodon web UI feels so much better than the earlier one, so I know they are hard at work, and doing an excellent job. Just expressing a wish here.)

in reply to Feral Thoughts

@jdp23 @aj @julian @scottjenson @alexisbushnell @mekkaokereke

It seems obvious, at least to me, that all responses, and responses to those responses, should inherit the “privacy group” of recipients set by the original post of a thread. So if the original post is followers-only, all responses and responses-to-responses should only be visible to the followers of the OP, not the followers of the respondents.

(continues)

in reply to Feral Thoughts

Another approach would be to make the OP an authority of all replies. Only those accepted by them would count as replies and show up under their posts - where the accept protocol could be similar to the one for quote posts. FEP-7458 discusses some of the details.
codeberg.org/shs/fep/src/branc…
@feralthoughts

Feral Thoughts reshared this.

in reply to Osma A 🇫🇮🇺🇦

@osma

Excellent idea! I have had this kind of thing in mind for quite some time.

Haven't looked at the proposal yet; does this also apply to responses to a response?

Say, user UA on instance A is the OP, UB on B replies to UA's original post, UC on C replies to UB without tagging UA, UD on D replies to UC without tagging UA. Can UA delete the posts by UC and UD, as per the above proposal?

I would prefer UA having that power.

@jdp23 @aj @julian @scottjenson @alexisbushnell @mekkaokereke

in reply to Feral Thoughts

Good question. My read of the proposal is that is each post has its own collection of replies, owned by the author of that specific post. UA would only list the reply by UB, not those further down the thread.
@feralthoughts @jdp23 @aj @julian @scottjenson @alexisbushnell @mekkaokereke
in reply to Osma A 🇫🇮🇺🇦

@osma

In that case, one of the abusers can write a mundane-sounding reply to the OP, and then other members of the brigade can pile on in follower-only (or mentioned-people-only) replies to that reply, leaving the OP unable to delete those abusive replies.

I feel the OP should have authority over the entire thread.

@jdp23 @aj @julian @scottjenson @alexisbushnell @mekkaokereke

in reply to Feral Thoughts

I can see that. Defining the behavior you want over the protocol might get complicated. OP could still detach the brigade-anchor though. Not delete, mind you. The FEP does not assign edit powers over other people's post - it just makes the replies list ownership explicit.
@feralthoughts @jdp23 @aj @julian @scottjenson @alexisbushnell @mekkaokereke
in reply to Osma A 🇫🇮🇺🇦

@osma @jdp23 @aj @julian @scottjenson @alexisbushnell @mekkaokereke

I wonder how ActivityPub-based Forte does it.

Also check

union.place/@feralthoughts/115…

and

union.place/@feralthoughts/115…


@jdp23 @aj @julian @scottjenson @alexisbushnell @mekkaokereke

Yes, I know. And Forte is ActivityPub-based, so other AP-based software should be able to emulate that behaviour.

I think a technical solution to enable this (OP having authority over the entire thread) would be to route all responses through the instance hosting the original poster.

@osma

(continues)

in reply to Osma A 🇫🇮🇺🇦

@osma @jdp23 @aj @julian @scottjenson @alexisbushnell @mekkaokereke

w3id.org/fep/7458 is for managing direct replies as you understood correctly. but there is a separate fep for modeling an entire thread, w3id.org/fep/7888 -- the problem in mastodon right now is that *there is no thread*. mastodon is assembling individual posts based on a chain of replies, with no real context.

Feral Thoughts reshared this.

in reply to infinite love ⴳ

@osma @jdp23 @aj @julian @scottjenson @alexisbushnell @mekkaokereke the basic idea is to stop privileging replies above all else, and to allow people to explicitly create discussion threads where the "OP" can "own" that thread (and OP gets to decide what to include or exclude). the problem with reply trees is that no one can "own" them, because they're not real (it's just a bunch of links being loaded automatically)

Feral Thoughts reshared this.