Check the version of an edited Mastodon post before quoting it

Start by dating each observation, not by picking a winner

A screenshot is a record of what one person saw at one moment. A live post is a record of what it says now. Neither automatically corrects the other, and neither proves what a reader saw earlier. Open a small note beside the quotation and write two dated lines: when the screenshot was captured (if that time is visible or was recorded) and when you viewed the live post. Then write the wording from each, exactly, in separate lines. The useful artifact is a versioned quotation with timestamps, not a single settled sentence chosen by preference. [Mastodon: edit history and shared-post notifications]

• Label each quotation with the time you observed it and the medium (screenshot or live page).
• Keep the exact wording of each version in your notes before summarising anything.

What an edit history can and cannot settle

Mastodon's editing feature was introduced with original and previous versions kept in a history view, and people who had shared a post were notified of edits. That means an accessible history view is the closest thing to a timeline of the post's wording. It can show that a wording changed and roughly what changed. It does not tell you what any particular reader saw, why the edit happened, or what the author intended. It also does not prove that a screenshot was taken before or after a specific revision unless the dates line up. [Mastodon: edit history and shared-post notifications]

• If a history view is open to you, quote the specific version you are using and say where it sits in the list.

Why availability varies and what to do about it

Current Mastodon documentation covers editing statuses and viewing a status edit history, but availability and access depend on the status and the server. Which controls appear can differ between interfaces and versions. Do not treat a missing history button as evidence that no edit occurred, and do not treat a visible one as proof that every earlier version is listed for you. If the history is not reachable in your app, quote only what you directly observed and record the gap as a limitation. [Mastodon: current status history documentation]

• Check the options shown in your own app version rather than assuming a standard layout.
• If history is not accessible, write 'edit history not accessible to me on [date]' in your notes.

Separate observation, limit and decision

Keep three things apart in the final write-up. The observation is the wording you saw and when. The limit is what the observation cannot establish, such as the original text, the author's intent, or what other readers saw. The decision is what you will quote and how you will label it. For example: 'This quote matches a version visible to me on 3 May; I could not access a history view, so I cannot say whether the wording changed before or after.' That sentence is honest and still usable. What it avoids is the quiet move of presenting the current text as if it were the text someone shared earlier.

When the source is absent, private or ambiguous

If the post is gone, restricted, or you cannot confirm that the screenshot and the live page refer to the same post, stop. Record the precise limit: 'live post not accessible on [date]', or 'cannot confirm the screenshot depicts this post'. Do not try to reconstruct a private post from replies, quotes, caches or other people's descriptions, and do not try to identify an account from a similar image or username. A matching avatar or handle is not proof of identity, and a privacy setting is not evidence of intent. The safe outcome is a labelled uncertainty, not a confident quote built on inference.

• If the post is unavailable, quote only the screenshot and say it could not be verified against a live post.
• If you cannot confirm the two items are the same post, do not merge them into one quotation.

A hypothetical example of versioned quoting

Hypothetical: a screenshot saved on 12 April shows a public post reading 'the proposal will be reviewed next month'. On 20 April the live post reads 'the proposal was reviewed last month'. An accessible history shows one earlier version. The write-up does not say 'the author said the proposal would be reviewed', because that treats one version as the standing text. It says: an earlier version visible in the history, quoted as captured on 12 April, said one thing; the version visible on 20 April said another. Any argument built on the first wording is then clearly tied to that date. This example is illustrative only. [Mastodon: edit history and shared-post notifications]

A couple more questions