TIL that in Mastodon you can do a more private reply on a post. I wonder if we could do something like that on Friendica? Right now the privacy of a comment is always the same as the root post. I know that the UX of Friendica not having post/comment threads idiom makes it perhaps more natural than what one could have in the Friendica UI. I wonder if the Mastodon API implementation in Friendica already does this even (I think it doesn't but I haven't been in that code in a few months)...hmmm... #friendica #mastodon #fediverse
like this
smellsofbikes
in reply to Hank G ☑️ • • •Hank G ☑️ likes this.
Hank G ☑️
in reply to smellsofbikes • •Khurram Wadee
in reply to Hank G ☑️ • • •Hank G ☑️ likes this.
Martijn Vos
in reply to Hank G ☑️ • • •Hank G ☑️
in reply to Martijn Vos • •Kristian
in reply to Hank G ☑️ • • •Scott M. Stolz
in reply to Hank G ☑️ • • •It comes down to which philosophy you subscribe to.
In Friendica, Hubzilla, Streams and other similar platforms, the person who started the conversation is in control of the thread. They decide who can and cannot comment on their post. If someone doesn't want to be limited by this, they can "share" a post and post it on their own channel with their own privacy settings. They can even direct message someone with a share.
The good part about this is it reduces the effectiveness of dogpiling. The owner of the thread can delete comments and even prevent people from commenting. Any attempts of dogpiling will probably get deleted.
Whereas, in Mastodon, and other systems based on Twitter, there are no threads, and you own your own post, and no one else's. People can easily dogpile because you can't control who replies to your post.
This is why Mastodon has to use blocking to moderate content. They do not have threads, so there is no thread-based moderation at all.
Personally, I don't think it would be a good idea for Friendica, Hubzilla, or Streams to adopt
... show moreIt comes down to which philosophy you subscribe to.
In Friendica, Hubzilla, Streams and other similar platforms, the person who started the conversation is in control of the thread. They decide who can and cannot comment on their post. If someone doesn't want to be limited by this, they can "share" a post and post it on their own channel with their own privacy settings. They can even direct message someone with a share.
The good part about this is it reduces the effectiveness of dogpiling. The owner of the thread can delete comments and even prevent people from commenting. Any attempts of dogpiling will probably get deleted.
Whereas, in Mastodon, and other systems based on Twitter, there are no threads, and you own your own post, and no one else's. People can easily dogpile because you can't control who replies to your post.
This is why Mastodon has to use blocking to moderate content. They do not have threads, so there is no thread-based moderation at all.
Personally, I don't think it would be a good idea for Friendica, Hubzilla, or Streams to adopt the same methods of posting as Mastodon or Twitter. Doing so would eliminate a lot of the benefits of our systems.
Instead, do a "share" but make it a private post or direct message just to that one recipient.
Hank G ☑️ likes this.
Hank G ☑️
in reply to Scott M. Stolz • •Scott M. Stolz
in reply to Hank G ☑️ • • •@Hank G ☑️
We can do that on Hubzilla and Streams. People can try to respond if their software lets them, but the server will ignore the comment and refuse to re-distribute it.
We can't control people quoting a post and starting a new thread, but we can prevent commenting on an existing thread, at least on our end.
Hank G ☑️ likes this.