Vague thoughts as they enter my brainbox.
The BlueSky social network has introduced "Reply Gating" - it looks like this:
You can write your hot take on Taylor Swift and not be inundated by weirdos replying to you. Nifty!
This is nothing new. Twitter has it. Facebook has the concept of "audiences" to restrict who your post is visible to.
And, of course, blogging has this! There is a comment form at the bottom of this page - and I moderate it. If you post something stupid, I don't have to subject my audience to your inanities. I can (and do) block users from commenting.
ActivityPub doesn't have this (yet). It's much more like a public mailing list. I can block or mute you - which stops me from seeing your abuse - but doesn't stop anyone else from seeing it.
Should ActivityPub have something similar? Yeah, I reckon so. I'd like to be able to say "Anyone I know want to go to the pub tonight" and only have mutuals reply. I want to prune away spam or repetitive replies. It would be helpful to have a conversation in public that other people can't interrupt.
The UI would be complex. And the social model needs a bit of work. And there are some technical challenges around syndicating which replies should be included.
But, ultimately, social media should respond to the needs of its users.
13 thoughts on “Who can reply?”
@Edent Threads has it and so does #Hubzillahubzilla
| Reply to original comment on social.wedistribute.org
@Edent sed 's/weirdos/people with different opinions/g' 😜
| Reply to original comment on social.treehouse.systems
Semi-related: I wish the idea of circles hadn't lived and died with google+. I like the idea of having separate but partially overlapping areas of interest, groups of people, etc without needing to create entirely new accounts for each thing. Maybe something for fedi to eventually pick up...
| Reply to original comment on bsky.app
@mikka @blog
I think you might have misinterpreted my post.
You might still be able to respond - but people who follow me won't see your responses.
You will be shouting into the void. My server will not list your posts as replies to mine.
It is OK for individuals to set boundaries on the conversations they want to have. If you come up to me in a pub and start talking with me and my friends, we're under no obligation to include you. That isn't "cryptofascism"; that's society.
| Reply to original comment on mastodon.social
@mikka @blog
You are, of course, free to say whatever you want about me on your site.
I am under no obligation to link to your replies from my site.
| Reply to original comment on mastodon.social
@mikka @blog
So if I am technically adept enough to run my own Fediverse server, I am allowed to protect myself.
If I'm not technically inclined, it is immoral to do so.
Got it, thanks!
| Reply to original comment on mastodon.social
@m @blog
The conversation can happen in public - so everyone can see it. But only specific people are allowed to reply.
This is quite normal on other social networks. My Facebook posts are visible to the world - but I only want my friends to be able to comment on them.
As I say, the mental model for most people will need updating. The UI will need to be carefully designed. But it's clear that pruning out unwanted replies is a feature that lots of people want.
| Reply to original comment on mastodon.social
@m @blog
I suggest spending some time posting as someone other than a straight white guy and see if your opinion changes.
Personally, even with my privileged, I get plenty of spammy / irrelevant / abusive replies. I've love a way to prune those out.
| Reply to original comment on mastodon.social
@m @Edent @blog Sorry, if I may butt in, --
"if you can read it you can interact with it"
Recently I started to look for parallels between personal websites, and social media profiles, to approach certain topics and challenges.
For instance, when people ask to be able to control how their public posts are used, which is typically met with dismissals ("if it's public, anyone can do anything with it"), I think of robots.txt.
| Reply to original comment on stefanbohacek.online
@m @Edent @blog In the case of being able to respond to public posts, you have blogs or news sites that either ask you to log in to comment, or don't allow commenting at all.
And forums can set limits for who can reply or start threads based on how old your account is, your "reputation", and other rules.
| Reply to original comment on stefanbohacek.online
@m @Edent @blog Well, I don't expect to convince you, just wanted to provide a different perspective.
I think the lines between different kinds of online spaces are starting to blur thanks to the fediverse.
You can add ActivityPub support to your WordPress blog, to a Discourse forum, and soon to newsletters hosted on Ghost.
Some of our expectations might start to shift.
| Reply to original comment on stefanbohacek.online
@blog gotosocial has the beginnings of this. Each post has a flag to set if it's likeable, boostable, replyable.
This is great but the granularity isn't there for only followers or only mentioned or anything else. (My information might be out of date)
Hopefully when mastodon introduces "quote boosts" it opens the door for interaction permissions across the board.
| Reply to original comment on sarcasm.stream
@Edent if it's written as a module, for the love of $DEITY it should be called "Otariinae"
| Reply to original comment on cyberplace.social
More comments on Mastodon.