Notices by Zagone (zagone@toot.community)

@AnarchoNinaWrites

Meanwhile, Comcast has put MSNBC up for sale...

Washington Post sold out...

Biden does fuck all, and is even renewing prison corporation contracts to run and build concentration camps for Trump... ICE (reported in The Guardian) deported a mother and her 4 children -- two of them 3 months old and American citizens, while awaiting a hearing...

Nothing like just obeying in advance.

@AnarchoNinaWrites

I'd rather see evidence they are planning for the future than this internal squabbling. Especially when they are once again cluelessly blaming it on progressives.

In addition to the racist fascists out there, why they really lost (as a Harris voter making close to minimum wage told me) was economic pain. Somehow the fascists convenced voters they were better for pocket books. ("Any ship in a storm.")

@jenniferplusplus @inthehands @graue

I may have misunderstood the original meaning of the post as strangers should not reply to TL posts -- rather than that strangers should not assume such are directed at them personally. (Thereby following that they should reply less often and very politely and carefully if at all.)

Agree reply limiting tools don't exist. Maybe they should.

@jenniferplusplus @inthehands @graue

I do think its implied in the medium that strangers CAN reply if they wish.

Put another way, "reply guys" are okay *IF* they are polite, kind, thoughtful, and respectful of differing opinions. And not narcissistically assuming its all about themselves.

There are considerations in this discussion of both when to respond and how to respond.

@inthehands @pointlessone

Paul -- We agree on many points (and certainly don't have to on everything).

You say: "people need to think about context and relationship in their communication, and that’s hard, and failure to do so is the cause of many of the problems"

ABSOLUTELY.

We could also (as you and others point out) use some controls on who can see and respond.

I think the only spot we have a friendly disagreement is in assumed right of strangers to respond. I think it is implied.

@pointlessone @inthehands

Aha! I just figured out what is bugging me about this. It totally reverses older online social etiquette.

It was/is the norm on email listservs, BBS boards, and online forums (maybe Facebook, definitely ancient CompuServe and AOL) to look DOWN on people who never replied.

They were/are known as LURKERS.

This may be a generational misunderstanding in part.

@pointlessone @inthehands

At least for myself, when I post here I *ASSUME* that I will get replies. It's sort of the point really.

Especially since the platform emphasizes "followers" not "friends" I don't look for people I already knew in real life (like Facebook).

This said, there is some social etiquette. I always hope I won't be piled on by haters. I try to be polite. I am hesitant to enter conversations with a majority of very different people discussing a topic I know little about.

@graue @jenniferplusplus @inthehands

Off the top of my head:

A color code system. Red for no replies (and no reply button), dark orange for replies from followers only (and a Facebook style option of only they can see it), yellow for all can reply, and green for please reply. I suppose there needs to be a symbol too for the color blind.