@lxo @oblomov @Jirikiha @macacator @MyWoolyMastadon @john @engel @everton137

[oblomov@sociale.network]

@benroyce @lxo @Jirikiha @macacator @MyWoolyMastadon @john @engel @everton137

You don't: you warn the user that one of the recipient cannot receive restricted messages.

You're making mountains out of molehills to defend an indefensible position.

[lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br]

maybe ask mastodon developers how they managed such a feat

you may want to ask GNU social developers as well

or maybe do your own research, instead of embarrassing yourself

you're destroying your reputation as a knowledgeable person on matters of software, if you had any

me dá vergonha alheia

CC: @oblomov@sociale.network @Jirikiha@raphus.social @macacator@mastodon.social @MyWoolyMastadon@toot.community @john@vyrse.social @engel@mastodon.social @everton137@vivaldi.net

[benroyce@mastodon.social]

@lxo @oblomov @Jirikiha @macacator @MyWoolyMastadon @john @engel @everton137

Eu estava pensando no efeito Dunning-Kruger

Seriously you both are clowns

You just drop support for antiquated tech. Completely normal and expected

This is the most hilarious farce of a thread I've been in in awhile. I thank you for the entertainment

[lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br]

funny how this excuse doesn't work for other incompatibilities mastodon introduced, no?

dunning-kruger indeed

you think they're lazy, incompetent, or malicious?

hint: can't be lazy because removing ostatus took plenty of work

hint: can't be incompetent because it largely works

hmm...

CC: @oblomov@sociale.network @Jirikiha@raphus.social @macacator@mastodon.social @MyWoolyMastadon@toot.community @john@vyrse.social @engel@mastodon.social @everton137@vivaldi.net

[benroyce@mastodon.social]

@lxo @oblomov @Jirikiha @macacator @MyWoolyMastadon @john @engel @everton137

Yes mastodon introduced incompatibilities with ostatus

They're called IMPROVEMENTS you doorknob

[oblomov@sociale.network]

@benroyce @lxo @Jirikiha @macacator @MyWoolyMastadon @john @engel @everton137

and still you insist on ignoring the point, which is that they could have kept OStatus support and only use the improvements for AP only. They could, they chose not to.

[benroyce@mastodon.social]

@oblomov @lxo @Jirikiha @macacator @MyWoolyMastadon @john @engel @everton137

i already answered that point. You can scroll up and read sunshine. But for the sake of your sundowning dementia: no one gives a flying fuck about an antiquated protocol except 2 absurd characters with the most hilarious obsession

but don't mind me and my sharp language. Remember i'm a google goon, libertarian moron, projection dependent, immoral drunk driver apologist

🤣

[oblomov@sociale.network]

@benroyce @lxo @Jirikiha @macacator @MyWoolyMastadon @john @engel @everton137

Yes, you already pointed out that the Mastodon developers not give a flying fuck about interop is a “fact of life”. And we already pointed out the ethical implications of that. Calling us names because you're uncomfortable with the ethical implications of your remarks only tells on you.

[benroyce@mastodon.social]

@oblomov @lxo @Jirikiha @macacator @MyWoolyMastadon @john @engel @everton137

The ethical implications...

Of not supporting a defunct substandard protocol

The *ethical implications*

BWAHAHAHAHA

Oh man this is exquisite

You can't make this shit up

[oblomov@sociale.network]

@benroyce @lxo @Jirikiha @macacator @MyWoolyMastadon @john @engel @everton137

And you keep ignoring how OStatus is only one example in a string of examples, but hey, again, whatever you need to protect yoursel.