Malcolm Blaney
https://mblaney.xyz
•
Feb 23
WeChat ID
aaronpk_tv
-
I think the issue that was raised was less about the reposting of the full content and more about how that content was presented in the UI.
When I repost something, I very intentionally designed my reposts so that the post on my site would clearly look like it was written by the original author and not me. Specifically that means things like not having my name or photo anywhere near the content, and instead having the original author’s name and photo in the same place that my own photo would appear on my posts. You can see some examples at https://aaronparecki.com/reposts
Granted I don’t ever show the full text of a blog post I repost, but I do show the full contents of notes, regardless of their length. In practice this means I don’t have many occurrences of large amounts of copied text. If I were to repost a blog post, it would show only the blog post title on my site. It’s debatable whether that’s a “real” repost, but I’m happy with that decision.
In any case, I still think the more important issue here is how the repost is presented rather than whether or not a repost should be allowed in the first place.-
I do something similar to this with all of my bookmark and [reposts](https://v2.jacky.wtf/stream?type=repost] as well. I’ve debated just making them into links with authorship but then I feel like the context as to why I chose to share it is lost.
This is a bit of an interesting question.
Posted in
/replies
using
quill.p3k.io
I'm pretty happy with my repost formatting in general, though there was a problem with the repost in question. It didn't find a name or profile picture in the original post, so it used the url as the name and my profile picture instead. The latter was a bug that shouldn't have happened at all.
Either way I think it's quite common for people to not what their full content re-used and there should be a way for people to specify that (or the reverse as I'm suggesting).