trwnh:to understand, respect, and validate stamps.
-
trwnh:
to understand, respect, and validate stamps. If a server doesn’t do this, then there isn’t anything that can be done other than to apply policies like blocking that server.
Please don't say nothing can be done, I just gave an option. Unless you, technically speaking, consider this "blocking" too (in a way it is, just very fine-grained and very specific), but from context I assume you mean wider blocks/policies. (Which brings us back to the social problem of "look, these servers must be bad, they are on so many blocklists" for example.) It may not be the best option, it may not be a worthwhile option, but it is an option, something can be done if chosen to.
trwnh:Trying to negotiate it as a capability is more trouble than it’s worth at this stage.
If this consideration is made, then this could indeed be a valid reason to not have it. In that case I would propose to remove the "nothing we can do about that" change in the current proposal, and also make the text less aggressive. For example
Servers not implementing this FEP will still be able to quote the post and provide no dogpiling-reducing friction. There is unfortunately nothing we can do about that.
to e.g.
Servers not implementing this FEP may still quote the post.
Maybe more explanation could be provided as to what was considered to alleviate this concern, and why it was not added, but I leave that decision to whomever writes the FEP.
Outside of this FEP; I do ask anyone who implements this proposal to make sure it is clear for those using this feature that this limitation must be taken into account, and this was a deliberate choice. But I also realise that's out of scope for this discussion.
