nokoto.org
What I consent to when I write a publicly-addressed post
Content Warningfedi meta
I write and acknowledge the harm that negative interaction causes and use terms hate and abuse, but nothing more specific than that.
I feel like there is a misunderstanding about what is public on the Fediverse.
If I write something addressed to or cc’d to the public, I consent to _positive_ (or pawsitive) interaction including replies, announces (boosts), likes, and being linked to _from the world (and beyond)_. Even though this is initially only delivered to people who follow me, it is also delivered and publicly-available on the instances that they are associated with, and I should expect positive interaction. The Fediverse works on the network effect as public posts are shared (announced and liked) to followers and delivered across thousands of servers.
I would like to think that I consent to a positive interaction rather than just any interaction, but, honestly, I expect the possibility of a negative interaction, and I should be equipped to deal with it by using block and report. This is unfortunate, and I know that many people suffer from hate and other forms of abuse, which may cause lasting and continual harm to them.
I should be able to withdraw my consent by deleting a post, and every compliant software would remove that content (if it gets forwarded, which honestly I still don’t understand how anything can get forwarded to a remote instance based on those rules). Unfortunately once something is available on the internet (or someone else’s computer, device, disk), it may be impossible to remove.
I do not have the ability to address followers only (or address privately) on my blog, but if I did, I think that would indicate I do not consent the post to be for public consumption, even though I know that people who follow me could announce or like it to their own followers, and thus it could leak out somewhat in that way.
And so I take the same approach when I read a followers-only post from some of the amazing people that I follow who only post that way: I do not interact publicly with their posts because I interpret their intent was for only their followers to read their content, and I feel like they have not given consent for me to share. In fact one of the amazing people I follow wrote that is exactly the reason they write followers-only posts.
**Is an automated service such as a relay, groups or a bot a** _**positive**_**interaction?**
For me, it is. I cannot follow hash tags, but I can follow actors (people, groups, applications, services), and because of this mechanism in ActivityPub, I get to experience and learn from a diverse group of people that chose to post publicly.
