🇳🇱
I literally just saw this from 2022... While I was busy not caring apparently this dude was posting shit online, and calls it "harassment" when a bunch of people with no association with me, many from his own server, called him out for lying about me... really weird definition of harassment.
Ogh and for hte record a quote-toot is simply a link that gets inserted into a toot.. If you think its harassment to link to things you say about me **pubblicly**, particularly when your busy lying about me and I've posted the reciepts to proof it.... well.. yea weird definition of harassment.
☕
@david@tech.lgbt
caps, frustration, fediblock, meta
That is horribly disingenuine.. Aside fromt he fact that my followers are well aware of my stance of civil discourse and not to harass people, it implied nothing of the sort.
If someone posts "Hey Trump passed bill HR 256 which makes slaverly legal again".. are they calling for harassment... hell no..
Worse yet this situation is even a step down from even that... We are talking about a person for MONTH was posting on every outlet they could find lies about me, email lists, their own follower base (keep in mind he has a lot of followers and is a mod of his own instance)... etc
I have every damn right to expose someone commiting active and deliberate slander and calling for harassment against me as well as blocking of my server when i have photo evidence they are lying out of their ass... and the fact that you would think otherwise is concerning to put it mildly.
This dude actively spent months harassing me with blatant slander and then complains when I **defend** myself and people get pissed at him.
For the record what he calls harassment is basically people saying "you lied, here is the proof" on his posts where he tried to harass/slander **me**... so yea, this is the silliest nonsense I've ever heard from you.
To respond to the example directly I don't think this would be calling for harassment, unless the post included a convenient button a reader can click to immediately contact Trump personally. In this context I'm arguing that a QT is akin to such a button. Which is very relevant to my whole point – it's clear you should be able to defend yourself against false accusations and I never said otherwise. I even suggested ways in which you could do that while avoiding unintentionally facilitating harassment – in your place I would likely just be posting screenshots, but that might be just me being overly cautious. Just linking should be fine, since most clients will not turn a link to a post into a contact-that-person-directly button.
I am aware that even posting screenshots would likely result in some unwanted communication towards that person, so you are bound to cause some of that when defending yourself. My point is only that imo you can minimize the harm without compromising the goal of actually setting the record straight.
Due to all that I would consider "please don't QT me" to be a valid request in the realm of asking for disengagement, even from a bad actor.
@timorl Their reach is far from small.. They have 5K followers, so my reafch on followers is only 6x larger... BUT as I said they were using mailing lists, and posting to hash tags which meant they were intentionally trying to spread their message (lies) much farther than me.. so effectively since they were trying to extend their reach, I was not, it was pretty balanced int hat regard.
Regardless I dont think that matters.. if you are engaging in slander, you deserve no protection for the consequences of being a liara and a shitty person getting out to the public.
I mean i dont see much of a difference between him explicitly putting my handle in all of his slanderous posts (which is a copy and paste away from contacting me anyway..
And as I said, if you get harassed because the truth about you gets out and turns out you were lying and being a horrible person... thats on you, not the person who told the world what you did, particularly when that person is the one you tried to slander.
You dont get to ask someone to not QT you when you are actively lying about them and publicly starting a commotion directed at them.. nope no way. If he were simply saying stupid shit and I was QTing him but it had little to do with me then I might agree.
@timorl Actually after a bit more consideration I think I was a bit hasrsh with you in both my tone and my judgement,... While I do feel I was justified I think you have some point in the fact that diect linking provides easier access to harassment.. though as I said I wouldnt say that is the same as promoting harassment, and you are right, explicitly stating to my followers not to harass could have been a cautious step to take.
Anyway I'm glad we communicated about the important part, especially since it's very relevant to your position -- both as someone who has quite a platform directly, as well as who moderated other people who also have big platforms.
@timorl iv3 always appreciated our ability to have civil discourse where we each are critical of eachother and do our best to reflect on that and consider it... so im glad we have once agai had a producive conversation, thank you.
Although I have to disagree with you on the QT thing (or even linking in general). With the number of followers you have this becomes a "Will no one rid me of this meddlesome priest?" situation, you don't do harassing yourself, but you implicitly ask (even if not on purpose) and make it easy for your followers to harass them on you behalf. The first part can be mitigated by explicitly telling people not to harass, the second by posting a screenshot or nothing rather than a link/QT (the latter is even worse than a link, because in many clients it makes it even easier to interact with the QTd post). Because of that, not being QTd is imo a reasonable request in the realm of asking for disengagement.