@Jain@blob.cat @ada@blahaj.zone @cody@misskey.codingneko.com Again it's going down the path of focusing on the "bad people", but I'll indulge you a little.
Does using software that doesn't support it make you a bad actor? Not necessarily. It may makes you an unaware user. And that's not necessarily bad. Or you may be a user that's deliberatley using old software to bypass these restrictions. It's not an uncomplicated situation, and someone may chose to block you if you keep posting after being informed, that's dependent upon the two user involved. If that user keeps doing it, maybe it goes up the chain. We already have moderation processes to deal with these scenarios.
Is it possible in the current framework? I don't believe so. I've done substantial research into this, so I'm not just pulling this out of nowhere.
Will it harm more than it solves things? There's significant harm being done at the moment, and no movement on solving the issue. Is this the right answer? I think it's a good start.
Is it user friendly and understandable? Explaining the advisory nature of this feature, documenting it and raising awareness of it is a big part of the implementation that needs substantial consideration.
Unfortunately automatically parsing a profile page is a very poor way to determine if I should show a specific federated post on my instance to users who are entering a search term.
I'd prefer to be given a clear direction on if a certain user can see your post in their search results rather than guessing and even worse guessing wrong.
Embed Notice
HTML Code
Corresponding Notice
- Embed this notice
Kaity A (supakaity@blahaj.zone)'s status on Wednesday, 17-May-2023 22:49:06 JSTKaity A