If you're a white person on the Fediverse and you've never seen someone called a slur, or threats made against them--congratulations!
-
@toothpaste_sandwich @dave I consider the maintainers closing a valid issue as unwillingness…
-
@dave @pierrenick This is something I really like about Bluesky, they let the OP “own” the conversation and remove harassers very easily.
I hope Mastodon can learn from this.
@thomasfuchs@hachyderm.io @pierrenick@hachyderm.io @dave@alvarado.social It's certainly a useful feature, but one with its own potential for abuse.
-
@dave
>The most information they can share is "see look, this *happens*. It happened to *me*."
That's the value of receipts -
@dave I was fully unaware of this. And as far as I understood from the comments, this has been filed as an issue and has been ignored by the developers.
I love mastodon. And I really think it should be like this for all the people.
Maybe it helps, if we adress this publicly? Like we expect men to act up on sexual violence instead of just shrugging it off as "never happened to me, can't be that big of an issue".
Sorry for my ignorance - where can we complain?
-
@dave@alvarado.social @flippac@types.pl I am not accusing anyone nor denying the harassment, but it's also worth keeping in mind that screenshots don't really prove anything, especially given how the accounts are sockpuppets.
If one is inclined to believe you, they'll probably believe you when you just say you were harassed. If one's inclined to accuse you of lying, they can easily dismiss screenshots as fabricated.
So the people who "need more proof" are generally not people who are gonna be convinced by it anyway. -
@dave@alvarado.social I feel like I'm missing something here, how does the target see the followers only replies if they don't follow accounts of the harasser(s)? Do people mentioned in followers only posts also see those posts, even though they aren't followers?
-
@dave@alvarado.social I feel like I'm missing something here, how does the target see the followers only replies if they don't follow accounts of the harasser(s)? Do people mentioned in followers only posts also see those posts, even though they aren't followers?
@HaruEb because they're directly mentioned, the same as you're directly mentioned here in my reply.
-
@dave@alvarado.social @flippac@types.pl I am not accusing anyone nor denying the harassment, but it's also worth keeping in mind that screenshots don't really prove anything, especially given how the accounts are sockpuppets.
If one is inclined to believe you, they'll probably believe you when you just say you were harassed. If one's inclined to accuse you of lying, they can easily dismiss screenshots as fabricated.
So the people who "need more proof" are generally not people who are gonna be convinced by it anyway. -
@dave I was fully unaware of this. And as far as I understood from the comments, this has been filed as an issue and has been ignored by the developers.
I love mastodon. And I really think it should be like this for all the people.
Maybe it helps, if we adress this publicly? Like we expect men to act up on sexual violence instead of just shrugging it off as "never happened to me, can't be that big of an issue".
Sorry for my ignorance - where can we complain?
@sibylle the Mastodon team is the right place. They have recently changed their organization some and hired some additional people, so there's a chance the complaint is received more seriously than similar complaints have been received in the past when it was really one man making the decisions.
-
@MxAlba @dave No, it doesn't work like that.
If their instance was breaking the reply restrictions rule, your instance would detect that when they try to federate the reply to your instance, and would reject it. Then you would not see it, and it also would not get federated to anyone who opens your post looking for the replies.
Your instance could also use detection of this behavior to automatically place the offending instance on limited federation and add it to a review queue of abusive instances that are candidates for defederation.
@dalias @MxAlba yes, this. "Public post but only <my followers and/or people I follow> can reply" would be a huge step in the right direction. It would let you say something to the world without letting the world talk back, but you still get feedback from your friends.
"I want to get this off my chest but I don't want to hear your opinion about it" is not possible in Mastodon today.
-
@shlee @fishidwardrobe certainly it's harder on the internet where the jerk is out of physical reach.
-
@dragonfrog @dave
How about "followers of the author of the original post that started the thread"? "Followers of anyone mentioned" is going to take a lot of queries to different servers to get the list of followers - and some instances may not even make the list available for privacy reasons. Followers of the OP could be done by having such replies go through the OPs instance.Having followers only replies gobthrough the OPs instance would be more eork for the developers, but the current solution is useless for replies, because two people with distinct sets of followers having a followers only discussion are going to sound like listening to one half of a phone conversation.
-
@dave OMG THIS EXPLAINS SO MUCH. I knew of the phenomenon ("I'm being abused but nobody else can see it") but not the mechanism.
Thank you much!
-
@TheJen I actually really love this idea, like setting off an alarm.
-
Would this change (in the code/design) be helpful, do you think: for posts that are in reply to something, give the original poster the ability to {reveal publicly, if non-public} and/or {completely delete, for everyone} those replies.
Maybe someone has come up with a better idea, but that's what comes quickly to my mind.
-
@TheJen I actually really love this idea, like setting off an alarm.
@dave For one thing, nobody could say "I don't see it" anymore, because it would force it all out in the open. Taking the burden off the victim I think is one of the goals here, yes?
-
@dave For one thing, nobody could say "I don't see it" anymore, because it would force it all out in the open. Taking the burden off the victim I think is one of the goals here, yes?
@TheJen yeah, and I think "change this to public" is the sort of thing that has a reasonable chance of working in the federated architecture.
-
@TheJen yeah, and I think "change this to public" is the sort of thing that has a reasonable chance of working in the federated architecture.
@dave Yep. That's what I'm thinking too. Fairly simple fix.
-
@TheJen yeah, and I think "change this to public" is the sort of thing that has a reasonable chance of working in the federated architecture.
@dave TBH, I don't even see it most of the time as I heavily use the block button, but I absolutely believe this is happening. There is also nothing that says you can't use the technology to apply social pressure. If bad actors know they will likely be outed and subject to social consequences, they may think twice.
-
@chocobo13 You can explain it to those who still thinks it's not happening.
Harassers also sometimes target hashtags or groups, so you could watch those (e.g. #MutualAid or #BlackMastodon and definitely #FediBlock) and help by reporting anything you might see there.
Also, read https://infosec.exchange/@thenexusofprivacy/112956213079993182
@gunchleoc @chocobo13 this. You can file issues with Mastodon devs and you can spread the word that this happens and how.
Steal my post in good health or describe the issue in your own words.
