I've written up a summary of constructive discussion on the consent-gated quote posting issue thread here: https://github.com/mastodon/mastodon/issues/20673#issuecomment-1358694689
And a sketch of what an implementation of those principles for consent-gated quote posting might look like: https://github.com/mastodon/mastodon/issues/20673#issuecomment-1358707886
@dalias Do I understand correctly that in your proposal the quoted party gets "bcc"ed mentions of any ensuing discussion of the boost quote? If so, why is this desirable? It sounds utterly horrifying to me.
@siderea No, the idea of the "b" in "bcc" is that further replies won't cc it, but I don't know if that works on here. If not, it needs a different mechanism. The whole idea is not to do that, because yes, I agree that's awful.
@dalias Phew! Okay, I guess I still don't understand what you mean to have happen by "bcc". Who is getting bcced? When?
@siderea The list of @'s in the post body text and "outbox" addresses for delivery are separate.
The idea is to include the quoted post author on the latter but not the former so they get notified and get to see the post even if they otherwise wouldn't be in the audience for it, but so anyone replying to the quoting post don't include them in @'s of replies.
@siderea "Bcc" isn't a term used in Mastodon/ActivityPub AFAIK, but the idea is that it's analogous to Bcc in email, where you omit the "Bcc" addresses from the outgoing email header but include them in the transport level metadata so that the mail gets delivered to them too.
@dalias (Yeah, I'm v familiar with email, hence my confusion.)