I've made a deliberate choice against a quoting feature because it inevitably adds toxicity to people's behaviours. You are tempted to quote when you should be replying, and so you speak at your audience instead of with the person you are talking to. It becomes performative. Even when doing it for "good" like ridiculing awful comments, you are giving awful comments more eyeballs that way. No quote toots. Thank's
@Gargron I see the intention behind it but still it is some way to control how people use communication and the fact that it has ben misused often does not purely justify to solely abandon it.
and yes - I also used it to speak to "may audience" often - but mostly to prove some posts wrong with adding facts directly to the related post
sometimes it was to agree on posts by adding additional information to it and/or reactions which gave also the original poster more value
@Gargron@floppy And thank you for not adding a quote feature! The difference between Twitter and Mastodon is like night and day. (I also became a Patreon supporter recently!)
@Gargron Respectfully, that feels as if it's based on a very early perception of quoting. It's now mostly used for highlighting and previewing something we want to talk about or comment about which the follower can see adjacent to your remark at a glance. And the engagement they generate is are far larger than mere replies, likes or RTs of something (which are not visible to the follower unless they focus to inspect them).
@Gargron Fwiw I always saw it as a way to credit the original post while staying out of the reply thread. A way to use the original as a jumping off point for a new post, maybe tangential, without hijacking the discussion or being argumentative. I understand how it can be co-opted but it doesn’t seem especially geared toward abuse. I don’t see it as a “problem” that’s it’s not here, but…
@Gargron This post is toxic behavior, denying user's a feature because you refuse to listen to them! Great way to highlight why a lot of FLOSS software has trouble with wide spread adoption!
@Gargron you're actually right. i was looking for an "RT" function, didn't find one, so i replied to the thread. Came to the realization organically before reading this toot.
@Gargron I think this is great insight and great product development. On reflection, this is exactly what that feature causes in my own behavior, so I'm glad to see principled product guidance here instead of blindly copying just because.
@Gargron This is probably the way to go. Nearly every time I've been QRTed on birdsite it's been to criticize. Criticize me to my face, not to your followers.
If someone wants to criticize me by replying to my post and then retweeting it, fine. At least I had the courtesy of a reply to me.
I was just answering a question that multiple new people asked me, it's not like I *just* made the decision. Didn't expect this toot to blow up of all things haha. This has been my position since that feature was requested for the first time more than a year ago
@Gargron Making decisions is nec and good. Decision made, fair enough. But I can't help but point out that the justification for it is full of holes. Sure quoting can be used for ridiculing awful comments (I wouldn't call that good btw), but it can also be used to avoid pulling replies off-topic, muddying the discussion. I often used quoting to give people their space and avoid confrontation. There are also great features in Mastodon that can be abused. Tech is just a tool.
@Gargron But quoting IS replying. It's simply including the thing being referred to so people don't have to seek it. A bare reply is often ignored. If someone wants to abuse, they will, but I've never see it done by serious people. Perhaps we can have this debate on a #tag to see my point. I'm fairly confident most Twitter alums will agree.
@Gargron I’ve requested it a few times and while I understand the rationale I very much want the ability to see a post, boost the post, and say something about it ie “here is why I think this is interesting” and get engagement from my community.
Maybe that is a different mechanism to avoid the negative behavior. Forward + comment sort of. Which is what I wind up doing manually.
Thanks for taking the time on this entire project.
@Gargron This is fascinating. I'm a big fan of quoting personally but I can fully understand why you've chosen not to include it. I wonder, with Mastodon being open source, whether we'll end up with a fork with someone implementing quoting as it's so popular. Potential compatibility across federated instances of forked versions may lead to interesting times.
@Gargron I’m not certain I agree with the idea that it will, of necessity, lead to toxicity, but I’m new here, and must admit to ignorance of other ways to do things. Ie. I could be blisteringly wrongheaded. In any event, happy to learn a different way to do things that has obviously been working for hundreds of thousands of people for years now.
@Gargron provides context on the design choice. A counter point is overlapping audiences who may be interested in the topic, and where the quote is tangential to the original toot
@Gargron This is an interesting perspective. I'll ponder it. I'm inclined to think not all quote boosts are evil, ill-intentioned, or inherently destructive, and in the event they are, maybe there are other controls available. But it's a valid position.
@Gargron I truly like not having a quote a toot feature and agree it's toxic, instead of engaging a person. I still have a hold over saying "account" which imho dehumanizes the person sending a toot. Thank you for not having quote a toot available.
@Gargron This argument makes sense to me, though from experience on the bird app, I would sometimes use "quote" to highlight a post from a different community to my own followers, with a personal message why I consider it important. I might also, for example, translate a post from German or Finnish to my mostly English-speaking followers.
Maybe making "quotable" optional could be an idea? But I also accept the idea that we need to use mastodon differently than what we may be used to.
@Gargron I think a nice compromise would be giving individual users the ability to opt in or opt out of functionality like quote tweets or allowing their posts to be findable by search. Another option would be allowing users to quote their own tweets so we can link related posts visually
@Gargron I had similar thoughts recently. I wanted a quote function, but then I thought about it and about my experience on Twitter. Best not to have than IMO.
@Gargron I feel you are overlooking the usefulness of quotes. I have used quotes on Twitter to qualify WHY the content I was retweeting was worth looking at. Simply just retweeting content may make people overlook the importance of said content. However, if you retweet content and write a qualifying comment such as "This is a very strong observation, because…" etc., that has real value. I agree with you, the feature can be abused, but would you not agree almost all features can be abused?
@Gargron this is probably my single biggest issue with this platform. maybe 10% of quotes get used like that, every other time it's either to boost engagement while providing commentary, to get more people involved in a discussion while not necessarily endorsing (as reposts are often interpreted), or just to ask a question that's too tangential to the original post
@Gargron I disagree that this automatically or even frequently leads to toxicity. I have never experienced that on Twitter (but I kept a clean timeline). I think boosting is more invasive: blasting someone they don't follow onto their timeline without any explanation. I often want to share fun or interesting posts BUT with a little intro or commentary for context. I really miss quote posts.
There’s a huge amount of discourse out there now with, in particular, #BIPOC people making what I think is a pretty solid case for uses that are absolutely not toxic. What’s interesting is that to me, this is in ways no different than quoting a section of an email - pointing out that I’m addressing a specific comment.
@Gargron I always liked quoting as a way to intro people who follow me to something that has a particular rather than generic interest. E.g. this isn’t just an interesting post on coding but one from a not-so-well-known author I know has some particularly relevant experience.
Is that performative? I suppose I think it’s a way of adding a little value above just passing the post on.
Not a big deal and you obviously have thought carefully about it but I don’t think it “inevitably adds toxicity”.
@Gargron I literally just replied with practically the same argument to someone else. What’s wrong with boost and reply? It’s one extra tap. One. Unless the goal is to make it all about you. Oh wait…