Back

That is, if @Gargron is serious about introducing the QT feature, the implementation would not be a cold one as was the case with twitter itself back in the day. The fediverse QT feature would benefit from the hindsight of how the feature enabled abuse on the bird site.

This is a point that a lot of anti QT takes miss: it seems to assume that we cannot, and will not, learn from what happened on the bird site with QTs. It assumes a direct replication of the QT function which ignores context.

Context, in this case, matters because the functions of Mastodon are different from the functions of twitter and the differences will matter for how the QT will be used socially.

Again, this is something that anti-QT folks miss because they are focused on the FACT of the history of QT use and not the possibility of its implementation in a new environment with different affordances and resources.

The ignorance of the above among anti-QT people is hilarious to me because my recent threads on this issue have prompted a range of really interesting technical solutions to the problem that could enable community building AND incorporate the unique aspects of mastodon's environment to make something new.

And yet, the majority of the anti-QT people shouted these suggestions down on the basis of the possibility for abuse. Again, I think this misses the mark where QTs on mastodon are concerned.

So, to conclude. I think that implementing QTs needs to be done with an eye towards the specific affordances of mastodon and an eye towards the history of their use. Further, I think there are a lot of creative technical solutions to the QT problem that don't involve mirroring its use on twitter. Finally, I think that people are just refusing to learn from over a decade of lessons about QTs in their arguments against them.

That's my take.