question mainly to proponents of quote posts, but anyone can respond:
-
t54r4n1@mspsocial.netreplied to trwnh@mastodon.social last edited by
@trwnh the relationship between a quoted post and the one that quotes it is that of a dunk and a dunkee. a strawman and the argument that shreds it. a screencap and the accompanying roast text.
its purpose is to elevate the quoter literally above the quoted and profit off the difference.I fuckin' hate quote shit
-
trwnh@mastodon.socialreplied to joelving@mastodon.joelving.dk last edited by
@joelving i’m trying to do protocol stuff, even knowledge modeling.
we have context, audience, to, cc, inReplyTo, tag, attachment — do we need quote/quoteOf?
-
grishka@friends.grishka.mereplied to trwnh@mastodon.social last edited by
To me, in Smithereen, it's a link preview that's getting some special treatment and that you create with a dedicated UI. The difference between quotes and link previews is that I don't do link previews yet. The semantic relationship is the same as when I link something in my own post. To quote something means to include it as part of your own post, possibly adding your own comment, to have a conversation about it with your followers.
-
a@pdx.socialreplied to trwnh@mastodon.social last edited by
@trwnh @darius I think the difference between a quote post and a simple link preview is that I expect the quote post to be more “live“. I think from a semantic perspective that means that whatever software is doing the reading understand that it is a post. I think (but I am not certain) that was missing right now, semantically, is about the post part, not the quoting per se.
-
@trwnh @darius In practical terms, I think the most important implication of that is that when I tap on it, my client should open it as a post, not a webpage. Also, embedded media should be live.
There are open UI questions about whether other things about the quoted post should be inherited by the parent, things like content warnings (probably) and @ mentions (probably not), but those all depend on semantically understanding that the thing is a post to start with.
-
tom@labyrinth.socialreplied to trwnh@mastodon.social last edited by
@trwnh No, not always.
For instance, let's say a podcast makes a post about their new episode. I loved the episode so I want to share it to my followers.
I could just boost if, but instead I "quote post", adding: "whoa, great new episode of this podcast. I've you've ever been curious to check the show out this would be a good one to start with."
I would not consider that a "response" because it's not addressing the original poster
-
agnes@pdx.socialreplied to trwnh@mastodon.social last edited by
@trwnh For me, it’s exactly what it’s called: a quote. If I’m quoting someone else’s post, the relationship is closer to “quoting + citing the source”, but if I’m quoting my own post, the relationship is “quoting = highlighting a specific previous statement, e.g. as a follow-up”.
-
trwnh@mastodon.socialreplied to djsundog@toot-lab.reclaim.technology last edited by
@djsundog so is it enough to change the `context`, or is there something else missing?
-
tante@tldr.nettime.orgreplied to trwnh@mastodon.social last edited by
@trwnh the quote post is a commentary/reaction/repost+. A Quote-post only makes sense if the post you're quoting itself is necessary for your post to make sense. The relationship is important (otherwise a screenshot would work) it's kind of a reply that wants to either address a different audience, wants to shift the conversation to a different aspect of the original discourse etc.
-
trwnh@mastodon.socialreplied to lanodan@queer.hacktivis.me last edited by
@lanodan @erincandescent so is it basically `inReplyTo` but setting a different `context`
-
tech_himbo@mastodon.socialreplied to trwnh@mastodon.social last edited by
@trwnh is the relationship between a thing i wrote and another thing to which it’s related not a function of my intentions? like, if i “boost” a post, without any other context, that act has a pretty limited meaning; it’s essentially broadcasting. but if i “endorse” a post, the act of endorsing rather than simply boosting conveys a distinct relationship between my action and that post; it’s distinct because endorsement means something very specific
-
trwnh@mastodon.socialreplied to erincandescent@akko.erincandescent.net last edited by
@erincandescent that is indeed how i see it in most cases. in as2 we can probably reply in a different context
-
darius@friend.campreplied to trwnh@mastodon.social last edited by
@trwnh @djsundog I am not sold on the idea that changing `context` in the encoded data actually does anything other than provide a hint to clients that "something ineffable has changed, do what thou wilt". I think changing `context` is necessary but not sufficient. HOWEVER, I am open to the possibility that the real work is on implementations to rigorously consider what `context` is and how it should inform their logic and rendering
-
trwnh@mastodon.socialreplied to craigp@mastodon.social last edited by
@Craigp so is it just setting a different `context` or is there more to it?
-
trwnh@mastodon.socialreplied to t54r4n1@mspsocial.net last edited by
@t54r4n1 i don’t like it either but i am trying to describe the general case where no one is dunking and the quoter is actually below the quote.
to the extent that such a thing exists, anyway
-
trwnh@mastodon.socialreplied to grishka@friends.grishka.me last edited by
@grishka so it’s just a link then? possibly a sort of attachment?
-
joelving@mastodon.joelving.dkreplied to trwnh@mastodon.social last edited by
@trwnh I'd say that that is simultaneously too narrow and too wide. Too narrow if it's to say something about intent, and too wide if it's about display.
I don't think the first (intent) is possible to enumerate, but the second absolutely is. Then I'd maybe simply do something like `rel` for an anchor and use `display='embed'`, `display='preview'` or `display='link'`, maybe as links in a context-collection or something. -
chris_radcliff@spaceup.cityreplied to trwnh@mastodon.social last edited by
@trwnh I would say “incorporates as direct context” rather than the “refers to as linked context” that a link implies. It was stronger when Twitter had the 140-character limit, which led style guides to declare that a canonical reference to a tweet was to include the entire tweet.
-
joelving@mastodon.joelving.dkreplied to joelving@mastodon.joelving.dk last edited by
@trwnh I see that AS2 links already have a rel property. Might be usable here?
-
trwnh@mastodon.socialreplied to a@pdx.social last edited by