100% agree with everything in this thread.
@herid I don't.
QT'ing isn't abusive in itself. But it is so easy to use it for the wrong reason.
So many times I have used it to just mock posts: "lol, look at this shit take!"
All these complaints also gloss over the fact that it is very much possible to just link to a post or screenshot it. It just takes a bit more effort. This limits the abuse potential.
@dynode it’s also possible for someone intending on abuse to post a link to a toot and send their followers there. this doesn’t happens on Mastodon because
a) people don’t click on links (which is why linking is no substitute for QT btw)
b) moderation on Mastodon is very strong and any high profile account sending their followers to harass somebody would be very quickly slapped down by the mods. My instance supports QT (I used it on the post you replied to). I have NEVER seen the feature abused.
Lastly, as Tyler suggests in that thread controls can and should be implementing allowing users to change which posts can be QTed and by whom.
You assume QT won't be abused because you haven't seen it up until now.
But what happens if Twitter really implodes? Trolls will then try to find greener pastures.
This social network is quite well-behaved -now- because of shared values. But that can change quickly.
I agree moderation is much quicker here because actual people, not algorithms look at abuse. But how will that scale if abuse were to increase greatly?
@dynode There are certainly many questions about whether Mastodon can scale successfully or at all. I have great many misgivings about it myself.
And yes, it’s a legitimate worry to wonder how it will handle a large number of people who have very different values and don’t intend to behave.
But if Mastodon scales it will take many years, no matter what happens to twitter. Even if twitter disappears tomorrow, existing Mastodon instances will not take in an order of magnitude increase of users, let alone two orders of magnitude. For technical reasons for sure but also b/c of difficulties in moderation this would entail. Many instances are already restricting signups even though the influx of new users which has been quite modest so far (compared to twitter size that is).
And Mastodon certainly won’t scale if it doesn’t get a LOT more user friendly (which in particular means getting QT implemented), especially to content creators such as journalists. Some other platform will win out or they will remain on twitter. If they do leave it will only be to somewhere which is receptive or at least not outwardly hostile to their needs.
anyway, all this speculation is for far future. now is the time to experiment and try things - while Mastodon is still small. I already mentioned two things that should significantly reduce the potential for abuse of QT. Moderation is one. Giving users and perhaps instances granular control over QT permissions is another.
There is also the dynamic of relationships between instances. I don’t fully understand it but from what the admin of our instance posts about it, badly behaving instances get defederated. Sometimes too aggressively according to him. This provides strong incentive for instances to keep moderation strict even if user numbers increase substantially. Hopefully this will continue although overuse of degeneration is its own worry.
All in all my strong opinion is that if implemented well benefits of supporting QT far outweigh potential issues.
Btw, FWIW, I don’t expect twitter to implode. it’s too big to fail and has a great hold on its user base. It’s basically a black hole - very difficult to escape. Despite all the terrible things Musk has said and done only a small percentage of ppl left and many (most? ) of those have gone back after trying #mastodon or other competitors.
All that is likely happen to twitter is that it will get even more toxic but will remain the biggest platform of its kind. If it does fail it won’t happen b/c of user flight but b/c of financial issues. or perhaps serious technical issues but that does not appear likely.
