My long-standing pet peeve with #Mastodon is the post character limit which forces people to make threads like on #Twitter. Sure, it's 500 characters which reduces the numbers of posts strung together, but it still results in a worse experience since posts are individually delivered to recipients unlike Twitter where they are presented together.

On my side, Mastodon threads are rarely complete unless the last post of the thread was shared with me, or they were each individually interacted with. It didn't have to be like this!

in reply to Hypolite Petovan

people who do not write for a living tend to ramble in text. The limit forces people to be brief which means I can engage with more ideas and ask questions if that person interests me. I remember LiveJournal and how you'd read like... Two short stories from two friends about it their days and miss most of my feed.

Also, I think the limits reduces the cost of hosting, but don't quote me on that.

in reply to Astrobach

I'm not sure about this. People were writing threads with Twitter's 140 characters limit, they kept writing threads with Twitter's 280 characters limit, and they now are writing threads with Mastodon's 500 characters limit.

Of course I can't know for sure how much longer posts would be without this default limit in place, but what I do know is that this limit isn't the end-all-be-all of microblogging given the continued existence of multipart threads.

As for the performance gain of shorter posts, it is absolutely insignificant compared to the storage size requirement of uploaded images.

in reply to Oblomov

You're missing the point. People work around the character limit, which means they absolutely don't care what kind of blogging platform Mastodon is. The lack of formatting already makes it obvious it isn't suitable for longer-form articles. The character limit is just punitive.

Also please don't assume people you're replying to are using the Mastodon web interface (think about mobile apps), for example I'm not even using Mastodon at all! And while #Friendica does a good job at gathering threads, it can only do so much with the posts it knows about.

in reply to Hypolite Petovan

Sorry, but I'm not missing the point, I'm just unconvinced that the character limit in #Mastodon is the fundamental issue, as much as the fact that there is no “best” answer to the question: who should #ActivityPub messages be delivered to?
Followers and mentions are the obvious answer, but anything beyond that is additional load on the network and servers, which becomes more and more important as the number of users and messages grows.

1/6

Mark doesn't like this.

in reply to Oblomov

Correct me if I'm wrong, but AFAICS, if one follows the #ActivityPub protocol in its most conservative sense, thread holes are inevitable regardless of platform, becase the only instance that is guaranteed to have the full thread is the host instance of the OP.
Any other instance will only have what they get through federation (i.e. messages from its users, to its users or by people followed by one of its users).

2/6

in reply to Oblomov

Platforms can backfill or use other APIs to retrieve the full graph of a post, but that's additional work that the platform chooses to do. So, how well does this extra work scale?
I applaud Friendica for doing this, since this undoubtedly improves the user experience, but how well will this scale when the number of users grows by a couple orders of magnitude? Especially when it can't use its own efficient API to do the filling?

3/6

in reply to Oblomov

The opportunity to backfill more is being discussed for some Mastodon features <github.com/mastodon/mastodon/i…>), and by and large the main issue considered is: how much extra strain does this put on the network?
Personally I'd really much prefer the experience to be seamless for me as a user, but if this is implemented at a cost that ends up affecting the UX in other ways, is it worth it?

4/6

in reply to Oblomov

And it might be easy to dismiss the thing saying «yeah, but that's just because Mastodon is inefficient and the character limit compounds the issue by forcing people to post more messages», but that's only true up to a point. And I'd really like to see the distribution of thread message counts in #Mastodon vs #Friendica. I don't expect the Mastodon ones to be much higher on average than the Friendica ones.

5/6

in reply to Oblomov

FWIW, I fully agree with your “It didn't have to be like this”, but at best Mastodon's character limit is just something that makes some fundamental limitations of #ActivityPub more manifest. To me, it's in the same category as the need to open an external link in my instance context to be able to interact with the corresponding object.
Rather, one would have to ask why people insist on using the wrong platform (aside from lack of knowledge).

6/6

in reply to Oblomov

BTW, I'm curious what you mean by “Friendica can only do so much” when filling the whole thread. I assume it backtracks the inReplyTo chain up to the first post, and then use the self-replies and other-account-replies collections? What goes missing?
Or is the issue that you need to backtrack over potentially long inReplyTo chain in the first place? Would a link to the first post in the chain from anywhere down the chain help in this case?
in reply to Oblomov

The use case that sparked the original post is this: I follow A. They share the first post of a multi-part thread of B who I do not follow. As a result, I will only see this first post because we only backfill threads, we don't forwardfill them (thank Goodness and also there's no technical way of doing it yet that I know of).

As I said in my original post, if A had shared the last post in the multi-part thread, I would have gotten the full thread. If A had liked each post of the multi-part thread, I would have received it in full as well.

This requires A to behave in a certain way because B was working around the character limit. It's not a big deal, but it is a peeve.

in reply to Hypolite Petovan

@lanodan #Mastodon also doesn't support conversation IDs, which allows threads to easily be broken.

Gargron kept asserting that they weren't necessary, but the GNU Social devs before him learned the hard way that they fixed all sorts of problems.

in reply to Hypolite Petovan

I've always felt Twitter was a ridiculous platform for anything other than shouting into the void for exactly this reason. Yet people insist on posting very long and very interesting threads there, that are annoying to read because it's on Twitter.

Still, Cory Doctorow's posts (I think he's on Mastodon?) still show up neatly as long threads for me on Friendica, so it does seem to work fine, at least in his case.