Gli ultimi otto messaggi ricevuti dalla Federazione
-
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
-
@amberage What you described is pretty much how I'd imagine this to work. Obviously you can't prevent people from publishing whatever they want on their website, blog, or social media, but there have to be ways to limit their reach.
Also, have you seen Mastodon's updated roadmap?
> Moderation tools
> Looking at ways to make moderation easier, e.g. shared block lists.https://joinmastodon.org/roadmap
That sounds promising, I think!
-
@manankanchu Would you consider a blog that has comments disabled a "suppression of discussion"?
Bottom line: https://stefanbohacek.online/@stefan/115940412454524948
> "But what if I have a strong urge to reply to a stranger?"
> Find a more productive way to spend your time.
-
@stefan I have quite a bunch of ideas for moderation that could prevent harassment in the first place, tbh, but chances of Masto devs ever implementing anything like it are about minus 9000%
What can be implemented re: reply controls is, basically, selective muting. A post could indicate "only people XY may reply" (i.e.: followers), fellow vanilla Mastodon servers would respect that, other ActivityPub software may or may not respect that, and bad actors certainly wouldn't. So while it may hide unwanted replies from cooperating parties, it would only ever do so on a good faith basis.
Twitter could do reply controls because Twitter is one company. All user accounts, all posts, all are owned by Twitter. It rules absolutely, for better or worse. That isn't possible with ActivityPub, where each post, each like, each follow, is just servers sending "hey, I did this thing" announcements into the ether and other servers deciding how to respond.
-
... suppressing discussion has never been a good approach...
-
@amberage I think these features mean slightly different things to different people, and my impression is that it is possible to provide at least some control to marginalized people who are most often victims of targeted harassment.
If this truly was impossible, I don't think there's much of a point in sticking around the fediverse if we can't ensure everyone feels safe and welcome.
And I'm sure moderation tools can be improved, but these can only be used after the damage has already been done. There have to be better ways for people to defend themselves before an attack, or before moderators can step in.
-
@stefan agree 100%.
-
@Edent @julian @stefan quote posts don't work, simple as that. Most other AP software implemented them long ago and those softwares don't give a shit about Mastodon's special have-our-cake-and-eat-it-too solution. I turned quotes off, hasn't stopped one Misskey or Pleroma user from quoting me or seeing unauthorised quotes.
All of those limit/approve features, yes that includes blocks, ultimately rely on the good faith of the rest of the network. Whether it's quote approvals, blocks, or any hypothetical reply control, it would only ever amount to muting by a different name.
