I decided to take some time to reflect on some of the #QuoteBoost, from the lens of moderation and community development. I expect these are not new thoughts since there's a lively discourse to which I'm largely oblivious.

Special thanks to @futurebird, whose posts have been especially illuminating for me.

https://write.as/collisiondomain/some-thoughts-on-quote-boosts

#QB #QBs #QT #QTs

@cd24 @futurebird I get the desire for them but in my experience the negative side has been much worse than the positive side. Quoting out of context to inflame followers is an easy way to gain notoriety. And replying directly to a post takes more guts than those craven simps usually have. I prefer boosting a post I find noteworthy and adding a reply if I think I have something to say to my followers. Boosting doesn’t mean I agree, it means I think it’s worth discussing

@PongoTwistleton @futurebird I can understand the intuition that others will abuse the tool, but I do not think the risks are unique to QB and avoiding rich support for links within mastodon really just makes the moderators job harder. The bad actors you’re describing there will still do a “QB” but it will be much harder for mods to enforce policy against them.

@cd24 @PongoTwistleton @futurebird one thing I find perplexing is the presence of both these responses:
1 quote boosts lead to abuse
2 a boosted reply is equivalent to a quote boost

What stops someone from replying with a dunk, and then boosting it and the original post, for their followers to pile on? Because that happens now, and is more costly to moderate.
"Craven simps too cowardly to reply" doesn't hold water. Trolls *usually* reply, that's how it works.

@isaacs @cd24 @PongoTwistleton @futurebird The only thing I can think of is context: “Look at this [insult]” works differently when you can see it. Having to click through and scroll back takes more effort, and dims the outrage a little. I think there’s some truth in that, especially since Mastodon is always a little slow, but probably less than people think (assuming that’s what they’re thinking)

@iramjohn

I was thinking about the merits of the opposite extreme. A system without any boosts. The only option is a quote-boost or a reply. In other words *add something* to the discussion, don't just passively re-share or like.

In examining why I care about this issue so much, I think one of the more personal reasons is due to fining much more value in replies and being quoted with a reply than in likes or boosts.

What we have here is a system that needs boosts to work and blocks quotes.

@futurebird Here is the thing: if everyone who wanted quote-posts moved to an instance who supported them (hint: there are literally hundreds, if not thousands, of them), they could have what they want and still be able to interact with Mastodon servers. Furthermore, if they went away from Mastodon _en masse_ to Misskey or Pleroma, and Mastodon was reduced to a minority actor in the Fediverse, it would have to adopt the new standard.

So, let's see whether those master ‘organisers’ decide to move their asses and get what they're asking for.

@iramjohn

@josemanuel

People won't need to move, the changes will come when some servers decide to simply update with forks that support the feature.

@futurebird Incrementalism FTW!

Listen, those who want that feature can't code, and those who can, either don't want that feature, or already have it implemented, but not on Mastodon or any of its forks. If you're willing to live with the _status quo_, that's alright with me. I do have quote posts on this instance, but, with all due respect, your stance is simply ineffective.