I know this is already on Mastodon team's radar, but I do want to stress how important this feature is.

@thenexusofprivacy @stefan “Obviously this only works with cooperative software ... but that's also true with stuff like DMs and followers-only posts, so it comes with the territory here.”

No, followers-only and DM *do not* require cooperation from other software because there is never any public link.

When designing peer to peer protocols, it is inadequate to offer users a guarantee which you cannot fulfill. The predictable results are software which doesn’t work as advertised & angry users.

No, malicious or buggy software running on a remote instance absolutely can ignore followers-only and DM restrictions. ActivityPub doesn't offer any guarantees on these fronts. That makes it unsuitable for anything confidential, and it's a good question whether most users realize it.

Then again when infosec and a bunch of other instances accidentally explosed all media in DMs to the world, and when kolektiva accidentaly shared all followers-only and DMs with the FBI, people weren't actually particularly angry about it, so maybe expectations are set correctly,.

@8124 @stefan

GoToSocial has already implemented this. As I understand it Mastodon the worked with GoToSocial to tweak the protocol-level specification, and the Mastodon implementation can build on mechanisms that were put in place for Quote Boosts. Not sure just where it is on on the Mastodon roadmap though.

@stefan @lobingera

@informapirata "the inability to reply to a public post actually increases the risk of that post being copied, linked, and screenshotted"

There will never be a perfect solution, it's true. But we can at least put up safeguards and empower people to protect themselves.

The bottom line is, the ability to disable replies is the top-voted issue on Mastodon's repo. Clearly people really want this.

https://github.com/mastodon/mastodon/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aopen%20sort%3Areactions-%2B1-desc

@thenexusofprivacy @stefan

atm not on this page

https://joinmastodon.org/roadmap

@kycm_ancy Yeah, I'm not going to lie, seeing how Bluesky seems to have reversed its decline over the past week, the fediverse has a lot of catching up to do.

https://bluefacts.app/bluesky-user-growth?t=3m

@stefan

thank you for prioritizing this. It's not a total solve (there are no technical solutions to social problems) but it will go a long way toward helping make our communities feel safer and newcomers feel welcome.

and to the Italian instance mod, that's cool you have no problems, tons of others do, and for us this has been an issue we raised repeatedly to apparently deaf ears. I applaud the Mastodon team for applying their care to this issue.

@informapirata

@stefan I don't think the Fedi is ever going to go mainstream, it's basically the Linux of social media

@kycm_ancy Perhaps. But I am curious to see what happens when Bluesky's money runs out.

@stefan I can only speculate but they did mention that they are considering ways to get monetized, but the first step will be ads for sure lol

@stefan

What I would love to see in addition is an Approve Reply function, to completely eliminate the echo chamber and allow a wider diversity of appropriate replies. Only allowing @-mentions and @-followers severely limits the chance for good, broad conversation.

@uc Hmm, I'm not sure I understand how this would work, mind elaborating?

@stefan

for someone who has not been approved before, or for all replies if desired, a reply goes into a moderation queue for the OP to read and approve or dismiss. Much the same as with some blogging software.

@stefan we already have reply controls. Every object has a `replies` collection that is managed by the author's server. If a) remote servers only use that collection for showing replies and b) the local server lets the user curate the collection, it just works.

@evan @stefan “If a) remote servers only use that collection for showing replies and b) the local server lets the user curate the collection, it just works.”

You’re not listening to the users, who prefer the ability to block replies altogether rather than to simply ignore them as you propose here.

For example, elsewhere in this thread @elena writes “Thing is, as a woman on the internet, I prefer to see what people are saying to me... so I can block accounts or entire servers if needed.”

@8124 @stefan @elena obviously, one should be able to optionally view responses that aren't part of the collection. Most social platforms allow this.

@8124 @stefan @elena obviously, one should be able to optionally view responses that aren't part of the collection. Most social platforms allow this.

@evan @stefan @elena Yeah, true enough, but then you are no longer talking about “reply controls” in the same sense which others are using the term when asking for this feature.

When they find out that replies are not controlled (after installing your software from a landing page emblazoned with “now supports reply controls”) they will get mad at you.

@8124 @stefan @elena declaring an acceptance policy ahead of time is helpful, definitely. "Only followers", "Only mutuals", "Only mentioned people". It can't prevent replies, of course, but it helps compliant clients and servers know which replies won't be accepted.

@evan @stefan @elena “It can't prevent replies, of course”

This is literally my only point, so I’m glad we can agree on it.