@renchap @julian @leroy

I feel like a first step we may be able to do is support <blockquote> and encourage clients to support that markup (currently @ivory doesn't support that html tag in content)

@thisismissem@hachyderm.io Yes, I've noticed that Megalodon also doesn't support blockquotes, but the web client definitely does (I just checked hachyderm), which is a great start.

@julian so perhaps more an advocacy thing than a feature change?

Little heads-up: So far, Hubzilla renders everything the way I guess it's intended. Nothing out of the ordinary.

@julian @trwnh @thisismissem

>How that is represented via ActivityPub is probably detailed in some FEP

FEP-e232? I think you can add content or summary property to FEP-e232 link to represent HTML content of a quote

@thisismissem @julian @leroy @renchap I take the same view as @leroy as well -- you can render replies as a rich preview above every post that happens to be a reply. Discord does this, for example. In fact, if Mastodon did this, then they would only need a way to tell when to insert such "quote replies" into timelines and when not to. It could be as simple as a boolean toot:quoteReply = true. With management of the `replies` collection via FEP-7458 (and some proof/stamp mechanism like FEP-0391).

@silverpill @thisismissem @julian I think you could define a Quote type that is a subclass of Link and use microsyntax to find-and-replace the blockquote with a rich entity with `content` or maybe even `preview`. But this generally makes sense only when you want that rich entity, and not just a "simple" blockquote.

Discourse for example uses [quote] tags kinda like bbcode, and they add metadata something like [quote author:someone,thread:2319,post:69] where the metadata is used in the preview.

@trwnh@mastodon.social part of the reason we don't do this special syntax is because we (probably) made the conscious decision to keep the composer as simple as possible so that end users wouldn't have to relearn a bespoke syntax.

... but I'm not really sure anymore. My rationale could just be post facto lol

@julian yeah, if you have a rich composer it's less bad. i don't think i've ever manually authored a quote tag in Discourse, for example. every single time i quote someone it's via the floating button that appears when you select something, or via the dropdown menu option

For reference, Hubzilla renders both the same way.

If you "share" someone's post (what Mastodon users call a "quote post") is basically just:

@channel@example.com 
[quote]Whatever they said.[/quote]

which gets translated to:

@channel@example.com
<blockquote>Whatever they said.</blockquote>

If someone quotes someone's post in a forum, it is the same exact thing.

And users can also add their own blockquotes to posts by using the BBCode [quote] tags too.

It's all blockquotes.

Note: This posts uses <code> blocks. This may not render properly on all platforms.

If I change my username after posting a post, the original username is still displayed on Activitypub？

@panzz I can see your updated username from Mastodon.

It’s interesting how NodeBB seems to be able to handle username changes just fine even through ActivityPub.

An interesting hybrid version I'm a bit unsure of the technical issues connected to, is offering two seperate parts : the blockquoted text and a signature with a link.

If the resource still exist, give a link back to it, scoping the source, if it has been deleted, delete the link and any reference to source.

It means that we will have quotes that you can't doublecheck the context of. But by simply stripping the text of it original context, you drop it in the context of the post of the blockquote.

The Implementation issues with this model though....

This is one of those things where it is a culture clash.

Forums are designed for discussions, and that includes quoting what was said. The quotes are purposefully kept intact in case someone else deletes their post and falsely claimed they didn't say that. Whereas micro-blogging platforms like Mastodon are not designed for discussions, and users tend to call anyone that replies to their post a #replyguy and hate being quoted.

Forums and Facebook-style platforms can make these changes to accommodate quotes that can be deleted by the person who was quoted. But the bigger issue is a cultural one. If a person can delete their quote, forum users will purposefully quote them in a manner that cannot be deleted, even if it means just copy and pasting the text, because forums have a culture of holding people accountable for what they post.

I am not sure how you will resolve this cultural issue with technology. There are too many ways to bypass it.

One thing that would help is if users could tell if they were replying to a forum or not. Because the rules & culture regarding forums are different than the rules & culture on micro-blogging platforms. But most platforms do not indicate this to their users.

Hi @scott,
indeed, #conversation_welcome or #one_way_sermon badges might help, too.

@Marcus Rohrmoser Some platforms, like Hubzilla, actually tell you that the thread (conversation) you are commenting on is from a forum. It helps provide context and also lets you know your post will be distributed to forum members in addition to your own followers.

@scott@loves.tech @Christian-Stange @mro@digitalcourage.social I think I disagree that a conversation need mark that it is a "forum". It explicitly flags that the thread is different from microblogging, but why shouldn't microblogs mark their conversations instead (I ask purely to play devil's advocate because it isn't feasible nor realistic)?

Especially in this case when you yourself said it's a cultural problem ( agreed btw), the distinction is especially meaningless to the end user, who doesn't give two cents whether they're replying to a microblog or not.

Hi @julian @scott,
yes. In fact I have yet to understand the sense of publicly posting and demanding being let alone with it. What culture is that?

@julian It's interesting how different platforms implement things. Some platforms, like Friendica, tell you which platform someone is using by showing a little icon next to their name on all of their posts (Mastodon icon, Hubzilla icon, potentially a NodeBB icon, etc.), whereas Mastodon makes it appear as if everyone is on Mastodon. Some Mastodon users are not even aware that they are talking to people on other platforms.

The reason why I say indicating that it is a forum or group discussion is useful is not just the cultural issue, but also because replies to forum posts are distributed differently than a normal post. You are not just replying to your followers and the person who posted, but also to everyone following the forum (or forum category).

But, this is something that is nice to have, and not needed. It just is useful information to have. And I doubt that platforms like Mastodon will make such a change anyway.

It's also interesting to see how platforms that pre-date Mastodon implement things versus platforms that came later and are influenced by Mastodon.