|
|
|
|
|
by colinsane
1314 days ago
|
|
here's how i see it: - a blog post is something i put out there for a wide audience to read, take something away from, and bring back to disparate communities. it's a prompt to start many discussions, with no expectation that i'm in or even aware of those discussions. - a public fediverse post is me opening a conversation directly with the readers. i'm dropping some idea in front of the other people at the bar, particularly the guy next to me with whom i've already exchanged pleasantries (my followers), but bonus if people near us overhear and want to join the conversation (maybe i'll make some new connections). it's this difference in distance between me and the recipient (both spatially and temporally). if a reader screenshots my words -- name attached -- and brings that elsewhere, that risks a faux pas: that's more likely to be them talking about me behind my back (why take the conversation elsewhere when i'm right here in this moment speaking with you? and why do so in a way which attributes me while artificially raising the barrier to obtaining context?) there's nuance here, for sure. someone with 50 followers might expect the bar-like experience, whereas someone with 5000 followers might accept that they're seen more as a spokesperson. screenshot-sharing (author's complaint) is different from posting the URL to an aggregator is different than sharing the URL in a group chat. most people i know out here are more interested in growing a dunbar-level number of connections than in becoming a spokesman. if you're crossposting i think that's the judgement you'd want to make first. |
|
The author wasn't just objecting to screenshotting though, but to linking ("some people had cross-posted my Mastodon post into Twitter"). Which seems basically the same as boosting, which is (I think?) normal no-consent-needed Mastodon behavior?
(I wrote more as a post: https://www.jefftk.com/p/mastodon-linking-norms)