Just an occasional reminder that disabling replies is the #1 requested feature from Mastodon.

[hyperlynx@aus.social]

@manankanchu assuming perfectly spherical commenters where there's no power disparity, nobody can shout down or intimidate anyone else, etc, etc. Free Speech only works under ideal conditions, in the real world it does not. Your own country quite rightly has laws suppressing hate speech, for instance.

And besides, abuse isn't discussion.
And besides, nobody owes anyone the right to reply.
And besides, the real point of free speech is *the right to say what you like about the government*, not the right to say what you like to some person and they are obliged to hear you out and platform you!

[mina@berlin.social]

@amberage

That's the basic misunderstanding that people have about decentralised networks:

They don't get it that once a message leaves your instance, you lost all control about it.

All this "Don't quote, don't reply, quiet public, followers only, opting out of indexing and search machines etc." is merely a recommendation, but cannot be enforced.

I always say: Only post what would do no harm to you if plastered it on a public bathroom's wall or take it to the police

@Edent @julian @stefan

[stefan@stefanbohacek.online]

@mina That is a solid advice, sure. But even completely innocent posts can attract mansplaining, tone policing, and outright racism and sexism, and worse.

I don't typically deal with this stuff myself, but on at least two occasions, after posting some pro-trans articles and messages, I'd have bunch of anti-trans losers show up in my replies.

Easy to block, but I just can't imagine dealing with that daily. Or on a bigger scale. I would probably leave for Bluesky myself.

@amberage @Edent @julian

[systemadminihater@cyberplace.social]

@stefan If you limit who.can reply there should be a setting to also completely block my ability to see posts I cannot reply to. No point in showing me peoples shitty drive-by takes.

[shironeko@fedi.tesaguri.club]

@stefan How would that even work, reply are not controlled by the poster's server right?

[renwillis@mstdn.social]

Really takes the whole social thing out of social.

[stefan@stefanbohacek.online]

@shironeko I'd recommend going through the linked conversations about potential approaches, but in my mind, I'd imagine each server would reject replies that don't match the reply settings.

Yes, there will be servers, either running outdated fediverse software, or designed to ignore the settings, and the replies might be visible there, but their reach will be limited.

Obviously you can't stop people from talking about you in their dark corner far away, just like screenshots easily work around quote permissions. Or someone writing a blog post about you.

Still, what we have now is pretty subpar and I've seen too many people leaving the fediverse because they feel unsafe and unwelcome. And they tell their friends who will never come here.

This has to change.

[feliscatusdomesticus@social.vivaldi.net]

@stefan

More and more, it seems that Mastodon is just Telegram, if Telegram were designed by idiots. "Microblogging" is a silly conceit held by a minority of silly users. For the majority of users, Mastodon and all others are simply a modern version of IRC chat. The moment you respond to a post- it is chat (or even worse- a web forum).. the moment it becomes interactive, it becomes chat. Nothing more. Micro-blogging is conceptual nonsense. Any linking to an outside URL/website nullifies any conceit of "Micro-blogging".. it once again becomes mere IRC chat pointing to "click and look at my off-fedi website.." The fedi has existed for long enough now. The devs need to sit down and have a reality check. Sluff off any of the old idealism from 2010 that no longer fits or has lost relevance due to the shifting usage patterns of the majority. Fail at this and the Fedi, in it's own time will go the way of ICQ, AIM, IRC, and all the others that came before but were merely instances of the same old thing as before.

[danimrich@mastodon.social]

@stefan This would also be useful for those accounts that are run by a bot scraping an RSS feed. I'm not too fond of them, but they seem to have a use for some people.

[manankanchu@mastodon.social]

@stefan

wrong comparison, I guess...

I'd consider a blog being similar to a newspaper and comments being like readers letters... unsuitable for discussion between blogger and different readers to each other...

bloggers writing crap are simply ignored, tooters writing crap are spread through federal and local timelines to hundreds of thousands like on Twitter.

Such crappy tooters will block replies requiring hundreds of thousand to take action by blocking/reporting... happy times for mods

[notsoloud@expressional.social]

@stefan
But what if I don't want a github account?

[mina@berlin.social]

@stefan

I reckon, exactly this lack of control and incompetent moderation across the network is, what drove e.g. so many Black people from the US away from the Fediverse into the arms of the next monolithic platform.

@amberage @Edent @julian

[shironeko@fedi.tesaguri.club]

@stefan right so the feature is actually "ignore replies to this post"

[nini@oldbytes.space]

@stefan I'll take limiting who can reply over denying replies outright, just feels a bit like you want a shortform blog with comments turned off in that case. Could work with some stuff but then it's basically an RSS feed so maybe not much use for a read-only experience on something that encourages read-write like Mastodon.

[fabianegli@fosstodon.org]

@renchap @stefan I am grateful for everyone pouring their thoughts and energy into making AP/Mastodon the best it can be in a complex world with complex social and societal environments where every change has multiple and sometimes opposing effects. I am looking forward to experiencing the continued evolution of Mastodon!

[pre@boing.world]

@julian @stefan A reply isn't really pushed into the fediverse exactly, it's just delivered to the followers of the person replying. And most of those will ignore it unless they also follow the OP.

If it's not okay for you from a trust and safety perspective, you can always just not do it and leave the feature only for those for whom its fine or preferable.

[stefan@stefanbohacek.online]

@shironeko Ignoring them still keeps them visible to others though.

I mean look, not much more here to add, we're discussing the top most upvoted feature request. I think we can trust that people need this.

[stefan@stefanbohacek.online]

@mina Yes, exactly.

But even with the best moderation in the world, having to wait for someone to come to your rescue while the abuse piles on, I can imagine that being off-putting enough.

Have you come across this explanation of the "Sucker-punch Problem"? It's illustrating a bit different point, but I think also explains really well why people having tools to defend themselves is important.

🅰🅻🅸🅲🅴 (🌈🦄) (@alice@lgbtqia.space)

Why reactive moderation isn't going to cut it, aka, "The Sucker-punch Problem". Imagine you invite your friend—let's call him Mark—to a club with you. It's open-door, which is cool, because you like when a lot of folx show up. Sure, it might get a little rowdy, but they have a bouncer, and you've never seen things getting out of hand. So, you're busy dancing when a new guy walks in wearing a "I Hate Mark" shirt and promptly sucker-punches Mark. You didn't see it happen, but Mark is upset and tells the bouncer, who kicks the guy out. A few minutes later, the same guy walks back in and sucker-punches Mark again. Same result. Some people in the club say they'll tell the bouncer if they see him come in again. Mark wants to leave, but you tell him it's not that bad—after all, you've never been punched, and you didn't see Mark get punched, so maybe he's just being sensitive. A different guy walks in wearing a "I Plan On Punching Mark" shirt. No one tells the bouncer, because they've never seen *this* guy punch Mark. He sucker-punches Mark. At this point, Mark is pissed and yelling about being punched. The club members talk about putting up a "No Punching Mark" sign, but the owner is worried it'll hurt his club's growth. Another Mark in the club proposes they turn away anyone wearing an anti-Mark shirt or espousing anti-Mark rhetoric at the door, but this gets shot down for the same reason as the sign idea—then someone sucker-punches him. By the end of the night, your friend Mark is beat to fuck and says he'll never come to this club again. In fact, he's going to tell anyone named Mark to stay clear of this place. The next time you go to the club, half the folx there are wearing "I Kill Marks" shirts, but there aren't any Marks there, so it doesn't come up. I've been sucker-punched every day, for the last three days in a row by some of the most vile hate-speech and imagery. The accounts are using open registration servers and signing up with variations on the username "heilhitler1488". I fully expect it'll continue as long as we have open registration servers. And no, username pattern blocking alone won't fix this, it'll help a little, but mostly it'll just make them wear a different shirt while they sucker-punch us. #OpenRegistrationHurts

LGBTQIA.Space (lgbtqia.space)

@amberage @Edent @julian

[stefan@stefanbohacek.online]

@nini Yes, this is a common argument against reply controls, but I honestly don't get the issue. If this is how some people want to use social media, so be it. I don't feel the need to reply to everything I read online. If I see something that bothers me, I can always report it.

Plus, maybe some people don't want replies, but will allow quote-boosting? Maybe that works better for some, this is really more about giving people the freedom to decide.

[stefan@stefanbohacek.online]

@renwillis Well, if you think of Mastodon as a "micro blog", and blogs can have their comments disabled, or approved individually, or only allowed for people with privileges, it does kind of make sense?