It always makes me sad when another fedi user - and, in my experience, it is always a woman - says that they feel unsafe posting here, because of replies they get.
-
It always makes me sad when another fedi user - and, in my experience, it is always a woman - says that they feel unsafe posting here, because of replies they get.
Control over who can reply to a toot would be amazing, as a way to improve this without them needing to mute or block post-harm.
@neil
I've already been called the N word and I've only been here a week or so. It's surprising how nasty people get when online.
-
@alex @neil Yes and no. If someone has fears, then yes. But the way I find new people to follow is when they interact with my posts. Having an option like that turned on would prevent me from doing that.
So I guess my answer really is YES, as long as it's an OPTION.
I have no qualms about blocking assholes, and I really don't care what they say behind my back. Unlike them, I have a life and it isn't centered on social media.
️ -
@neil
I've already been called the N word and I've only been here a week or so. It's surprising how nasty people get when online.@Shewolfnm I'm so sorry - that is just awful
-
@evdelen As you say, that is post visibility, not reply control.
-
@neil I'm still looking at what's involved in creating subscribeable blocklists. The basic hook into the block functionality on the server is obvious enough, but the list itself involves learning everything about the ActivityPub protocol and the federation and syndication models. Making it useful involves having categorization and user ratings while preventing abuse of them too. Straightforward in concept, terminally hirsute in implementation.
-
-
@HunterZ @neil Subscribeable blocklists are a technical issue, and I can state a number of good use cases for them.
Abuse of a blocklist by it's creator (misleading subscribers about criteria, doing a bait-and-switch after getting a subscriber base) is completely separate, and yes _that's_ a social issue. Hence my concern for categorization and ratings, and ways to prevent those from being abused to give a list a false reputation.
-
@HunterZ @neil Subscribeable blocklists are a technical issue, and I can state a number of good use cases for them.
Abuse of a blocklist by it's creator (misleading subscribers about criteria, doing a bait-and-switch after getting a subscriber base) is completely separate, and yes _that's_ a social issue. Hence my concern for categorization and ratings, and ways to prevent those from being abused to give a list a false reputation.
-
@HunterZ @neil Subscribeable blocklists are a technical issue, and I can state a number of good use cases for them.
Abuse of a blocklist by it's creator (misleading subscribers about criteria, doing a bait-and-switch after getting a subscriber base) is completely separate, and yes _that's_ a social issue. Hence my concern for categorization and ratings, and ways to prevent those from being abused to give a list a false reputation.
-
@HunterZ @neil Did I say anything about it being at the instance level? No, I did not.
The use cases all involve decisions by individual users about which blocklists to subscribe to. It certainly _could_ be used by an instance admin, but we already give them that power by allowing instance-level blocking in the first place. The social issue there isn't subscribeable blocklilsts, it's having an instance admin you can't trust not to block people inappropriately by whatever mechanism.
-
It always makes me sad when another fedi user - and, in my experience, it is always a woman - says that they feel unsafe posting here, because of replies they get.
Control over who can reply to a toot would be amazing, as a way to improve this without them needing to mute or block post-harm.
@neil remember when Mastodon asked for changes to be made to the interaction policies FEP specifically so they can opt out of implementing reply and boost control?
i remember. -
@neil I'm still looking at what's involved in creating subscribeable blocklists. The basic hook into the block functionality on the server is obvious enough, but the list itself involves learning everything about the ActivityPub protocol and the federation and syndication models. Making it useful involves having categorization and user ratings while preventing abuse of them too. Straightforward in concept, terminally hirsute in implementation.
-
@neil Can you in RL control who`s replying to words you said?
@electricfusionQ @neil this is real life too, mon.
-
It always makes me sad when another fedi user - and, in my experience, it is always a woman - says that they feel unsafe posting here, because of replies they get.
Control over who can reply to a toot would be amazing, as a way to improve this without them needing to mute or block post-harm.
-
It always makes me sad when another fedi user - and, in my experience, it is always a woman - says that they feel unsafe posting here, because of replies they get.
Control over who can reply to a toot would be amazing, as a way to improve this without them needing to mute or block post-harm.
@neil ultimately, fedi's culture of men constantly centering themselves, reply-guying, being weird and condescending and creepy to women and fems, and so forth, is a social-cultural problem. and while better tools can help to shield us from the worst of it, you can't solve a social problem with technical solutions. in other words, it's the culture of misogyny that needs to change, or nothing will fundamentally change.
-
It always makes me sad when another fedi user - and, in my experience, it is always a woman - says that they feel unsafe posting here, because of replies they get.
Control over who can reply to a toot would be amazing, as a way to improve this without them needing to mute or block post-harm.
@neil Women. Black people. Jews...
-
It always makes me sad when another fedi user - and, in my experience, it is always a woman - says that they feel unsafe posting here, because of replies they get.
Control over who can reply to a toot would be amazing, as a way to improve this without them needing to mute or block post-harm.
You can set it so only followers or people mentioned in a post can see it. Would that not achieve the same result as you cannot reply to what you cannot see.
-
You can set it so only followers or people mentioned in a post can see it. Would that not achieve the same result as you cannot reply to what you cannot see.
@the5thColumnist @neil no – it limits the audience, not what the audience can do. (additionally, the followers-only visibility doesn't do what you think it does – the audience changes with each message.)
-
It always makes me sad when another fedi user - and, in my experience, it is always a woman - says that they feel unsafe posting here, because of replies they get.
Control over who can reply to a toot would be amazing, as a way to improve this without them needing to mute or block post-harm.
@neil the problem is more the server itself, had been on two or tree server, never had the issue (i do not say the issue don't exist), just say that on server with good moderation, the issue is blocked even before starting.
-
Every time I mention this, at least one man pops up to say that they would not want to follow a woman who chooses to restrict replies.
So here, I have covered it in advance
@neil obliging of them to make us aware that they're part of the problem
