> Tombstone one and use the other.

Like I said:

> If I do that, then the people who don’t see the federated content (e.g. Threads users with federation disabled) will stop seeing what I post.

> people post on Facebook and Twitter and don’t quit because someone has a similar schtick/account name/or just one account.

When people post the same thing to Facebook and Twitter, those posts don’t end up in the same feed. They do with federation and Threads / Mastodon.

▲

bee_rider 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

So, is the problem that you have accounts on both networks. You would be OK with just posting to both accounts, but for people who have the federation toggle on, they’ll get a duplicate view of your posts?

That actually does seem annoying. You probably can’t do anything about it, but it seems like it would be extremely easy to fix on the platforms’ sides. Since you are intentionally trying not to have people get dupes of your posts, they could just add the ability to tag a post with some identifier, then not show posts that have the same identifier, and rely on you tag your posts appropriately (and an obvious feature would be to automate that tagging and include it in the various “share to <other platform>” buttons).

▲

righthand 3 days ago | parent [-]

If I’m interested in following you why would I subscribe to both your Threads and Mastodon account?

	▲	bee_rider 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		I don’t know. Maybe they post different types of content on each network, but there’s some content that they post to both.

▲

ethbr1 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It'd be nice to have an HTTP 301-equivalent forwarding option + verify control via hashing.

E.g. one could make a special post on the "continuing" feed, then tag the "killed" feed with 301+hash for auto-redirects (and/or dedupe)

▲

righthand 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Right so your quibble is that part of your audience is not portable, not that federation makes posting harder. You either maintain a centralized service account or you don’t. That hasn’t changed with Meta services. It is Threads that doesn’t allow for portability.

Further a tombstone would point users to the new account if they choose to continue following you. This can be done in a post and your bio.

How bad is it that your two accounts end up in the same feed? By your own admission Threads is a different audience.

▲

em-bee 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

well, the problem here obviously is that threads is not fully federated. and therefore if that is a concern you need to treat your thread account as not federated too. federation only works if everyone that you want to reach is in it.

▲

JimDabell 3 days ago | parent [-]

> the problem here obviously is that threads is not fully federated.

It is federated for the people that want it. It’s a setting.

> you need to treat your thread account as not federated too.

But it’s federated for some people and not for others, so there isn’t a single behaviour I can take that consistently works.

	▲	jedahan 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		I am having trouble imagining the failure mode you are trying to avoid. It sounds like threads implementation of federation is broken. What effects does toggling that federation setting on or off do? Like if someone is following “duplicate” accounts of yours and therefore would see double posts, that person can unfollow one. Still double work for you that kind of sucks. Scuttlebutt had some work done on publicly declaring two identities as the same, I wonder what that would look like for posts. Like a post-id or simple equality comparison or hash could work server side or client side.