If Alice makes a followers-only post, and Bob replies to it, to whom should Bob's reply be visible?

@evan (though there are threat models to think about, like 'is one of alice's friends bob's stalker and they might see bob's reply and glean information from it?', which you just kind of have to bake in to the world-weary hellhole that is planet earth)

@evan I think the default presumption that everyone is welcome to become part of any conversation is only that: an unconsidered default assumption inherited from Twitter and specifically from early Twitter's growth-at-any-cost corporate goals. At the very least we should be considering counterbalancing options.

@mayintoronto @evan Friendica has a system that allows you to define lists comparable to reading lists for posts (or custom-add viewers to posts as you go) - that would resolve this whole situation, and allow people to have more contextual human-shaped discussions (like taking discussion in which you’re trying to find common ground with someone outside your political sphere to the kitchen at a party rather than having your most strident friends come to chew them out for not being already correct, or being able to plan the surprise party or tabletop twist without the whole world and the targets of said surprise hearing about it.) I really want it to get some renewed developmental interest for that reason - mastodon, akin to twitter before it, is sort of a public broadcasting system….

@evan EXACTLY what I imagined.
So, the answer would be visible to the intersect between them.
Of course, how that scales as *those* people reply... there lies the rub.

@mhoye it's not about everyone having access to every conversation. When I make a friend's-only post on Instagram or Facebook, I expect my friends and family to be able to talk to each other. These conversations are really precious and intimate to me. I would hate to have them attenuate to nothing because no one could see each other's replies.

@evan @mhoye If someone goes followers-only, I think we can assume they're here to talk to their friends and nobody else.

I feel like I'm violating their trust if my replies leak out of their containment. Especially when that could potentially drive harassment.

@maj Dawn's and my answer would be all of Alice's followers. I don't like the intersection answer, because it gets smaller and smaller over time. I think Alice's intent is to have her friends and family have a conversation, like it works on Instagram and Facebook.

@evan In that context, I would expect that the venn overlap I'm describing would be quite large, but it certainly seems like something we could actually measure and experiment with if it were presented as an option.

@flyingsquirrel @evan I think this is a fair assessment. If the default setting - particularly for somebody with a large number of followers - is that a reply causes a friends-only post to immediately break containment, that makes any reply from anyone who does numbers on here an act of bad faith, intended or not.

@flyingsquirrel @evan Possibly worse: I've got almost 6k followers on here, because I guess I bring some funny now and then.

But if I have a vulnerable friend On Here, who maybe feels safe with a small number of curated mutuals and posts something friends only, and my reply brings _six thousand randos_ into the mix? Then I ... can't be that person's friend anymore; not on here at least, not responsibly. I can't talk to them at all.

@evan @maj I voted for the broader answer, but I have to admit they the intersectional approach is closer to what happens in real life.

@evan But mastodon posts are visible to the public, without a login. Is there anywhere that isn't the case? Everyone who wants to can see all the posts, no?

@twobiscuits @evan
You can make posts that are only visible to those mentioned.

@kariboka @evan oh is THAT why that happens??

@twobiscuits no.

https://docs.joinmastodon.org/user/posting/#privacy

@danso @evan

@evan Hm. I chose "other" but now I think what I meant to select was
"both Alice's and Bob's followers"

@evan

it's about principals

i chose "Alice's followers"

to me the imperative here is:

Alice "owns" their top level post and all replies to it

thus Alice's communication style overwhelms the style of anyone who responds to them, in that context

this has much further architecture implications than just your question. but for the matter here, all replies to a top level post defer on all communication style questions to style of the author of the top level post

@mhoye @evan

if Bob replies to a post by Alice, they are implictily relinquishing their communication style to the style of Alice, because it is Alice's top level post. Alice "owns" the conversation as top level poster

Bob must consider the implications of that before replying

that solves the problem

the structure of a conversation is beholden to the imperatives of the starter of that conversation. it should not be hijacked

your other concerns are valid

but are overruled in this context

@evan

Ideally visibility should be thread scoped with replies able to restrict it but not expand it