Comment by khalic
6 hours ago
Ah Gizmodo, always the paragon of good journalism. The person has explicitly asked her tweets not be used in external websites, and of course this zombie tabloid doesn't give a damn
6 hours ago
Ah Gizmodo, always the paragon of good journalism. The person has explicitly asked her tweets not be used in external websites, and of course this zombie tabloid doesn't give a damn
It’s a request, and requests may be denied or ignored.
If they cared, they wouldn’t post publicly or the service would not allow that message to embedded.
An enforceable request is called a “demand”, and unless you’re actually capable of enforcing it, it is in fact still just a request.
It would have been polite to honor the request, but they are under no obligation to do so.
Don’t make public posts if you don’t want them publicly displayed.
To paraphrase, you're not wrong, you're just a jerk.
“Please don’t show people my public post” is an absurd request to make.
Why can the post even be embedded at all in this case? If Gizmodo was forced to screenshot it to circumvent that you might have a point.
12 replies →
The person who has that setting is the user being quoted, not the top-level post; the bluesky is indeed blocking that post in question, so it isn't appearing on Gizmodo
See here :https://skyview.social/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbsky.app%2Fprofile...
The post they quoted is the one that's marked as "do not share".
Do not read this comment.
Wait...you're still reading, defying my T&Cs!
The tag to not display on external websites is up to Bluesky to enforce. I mean, you understand those Bluesky chirps or whatever are literally being served by Bluesky, right?
it is being 'enforced' by the bsky embed, the post not shown is the quoted one: https://skyview.social/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbsky.app%2Fprofile...
Ah this makes much more sense. So instead of it being a label on the embedded item, it's noting the one that's missing.