4 ms·

This article echoes what strikes me as a really silly sentiment that I also see on Mastodon because it strikes me as antithetical to Mastodon. The point of the

by jrm4 4y ago

This article echoes what strikes me as a really silly sentiment that I also see on Mastodon because it strikes me as antithetical to Mastodon. The point of the service is to "spread the things you say most everywhere." That is the design. It's literally designed to do what the opposite of "privacy" is. And yet, here we are. I'm sorry, but these kind of discussions to me sound like "What if we could have email, except your posts don't go to any other person, you just read them yourself?" I mean, you could use gmail to do this. It would technically work. But it's not what it's designed for, and much better ways to do this already exist.

m-p-3 4y ago
But on the other hand you have a popular platform, with a lot of people who can help, and with which some people are already used to, that you could deploy internally and use as some sort of internal messageboard that can be easily used from anywhere, with an official and third-party mobile apps already available.
- jrm4 4y ago
  That's fine, but I'm pretty sure that's not the design/use the author is talking about.
nightpool 4y ago
I think it's more like "What if you could have email, but your posts only go to the people you want them to?" I think that's pretty easy with Gmail, for the most part, but with Mastodon it's harder because it inverts that control—anyone can follow you (or send a follow request), and it's harder to police every follower individually. This is combined with the fact that most accounts are available anonymously on the web, but it's not really necessary (many are not, for instance, and even the ones that are aren't really convenient to access that way—for bad-faith actors, it's more convenient to sign up for an account on mastodon.social or some other "well known" server and then find posts that way by browsing timelines).
- jrm4 4y ago
  Yes. Because that's the design. If you don't what your posts to go everywhere, use something that's not designed for your posts to go everywhere on. There are other things.
swyx 4y ago
yeah I did not know about this community policy and this was the first time I was significantly discouraged from using Mastodon. I use search to do research on links all the time (https://www.swyx.io/twitter-metacommentary https://www.swyx.io/twitter-metacommentary). If I read something good, usually plonking it into HN search or Twitter search yields a dozen more related points and rabbit holes I can go down. I can even engage with the author or find their thread of thinking or responses to a question I had that may already have been asked (or better, questions I didnt think to ask) Without Mastodon search all these metaconversations about topics are lost.
- jrm4 4y ago
  Right, but I think the thing is the "protocol" is (or can be) stronger than the policy. Which is why over there I'm presently unpopular with lots of people on many sides of issues, because (this is rough, but hey) e.g. too many white people are going "ooh, no racism discussion here please, I'm too delicate." and also too many black people are like "if i see the slightest thing that looks a little bit like racism defederate and block that whole server!"
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

by jrm4 4y ago

m-p-3 4y ago

But on the other hand you have a popular platform, with a lot of people who can help, and with which some people are already used to, that you could deploy internally and use as some sort of internal messageboard that can be easily used from anywhere, with an official and third-party mobile apps already available.

jrm4 4y ago
That's fine, but I'm pretty sure that's not the design/use the author is talking about.

nightpool 4y ago

I think it's more like "What if you could have email, but your posts only go to the people you want them to?" I think that's pretty easy with Gmail, for the most part, but with Mastodon it's harder because it inverts that control—anyone can follow you (or send a follow request), and it's harder to police every follower individually. This is combined with the fact that most accounts are available anonymously on the web, but it's not really necessary (many are not, for instance, and even the ones that are aren't really convenient to access that way—for bad-faith actors, it's more convenient to sign up for an account on mastodon.social or some other "well known" server and then find posts that way by browsing timelines).

jrm4 4y ago
Yes. Because that's the design. If you don't what your posts to go everywhere, use something that's not designed for your posts to go everywhere on. There are other things.

swyx 4y ago

yeah I did not know about this community policy and this was the first time I was significantly discouraged from using Mastodon. I use search to do research on links all the time (https://www.swyx.io/twitter-metacommentary https://www.swyx.io/twitter-metacommentary). If I read something good, usually plonking it into HN search or Twitter search yields a dozen more related points and rabbit holes I can go down. I can even engage with the author or find their thread of thinking or responses to a question I had that may already have been asked (or better, questions I didnt think to ask) Without Mastodon search all these metaconversations about topics are lost.

jrm4 4y ago
Right, but I think the thing is the "protocol" is (or can be) stronger than the policy. Which is why over there I'm presently unpopular with lots of people on many sides of issues, because (this is rough, but hey) e.g. too many white people are going "ooh, no racism discussion here please, I'm too delicate." and also too many black people are like "if i see the slightest thing that looks a little bit like racism defederate and block that whole server!"

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]