I’ve never been on twitter, but I’m not that surprised so many of us here were driving engagement.
People haven’t adjusted yet to the reality that online social ecosystems matter, they affect so much in the real world. Decimating multiple online spaces in such a short time has consequences and i hate that a handful of random guys with no stake in any of it except money get to make decisions like that.
Such is the fate of hypercentralized spaces. The fediverse fixes this.
Hopefully the next places will be more durable. It is still SAD and damaging when vibrant communities get destroyed though. I am more lamenting that.
Not really, profiles cannot easily migrate and they lose their connections in the process
Surely this could be good, right?
If celebrities need to be accessible to their biggest fans, maybe it would induce them to leave the birdsite? And if this is as big a migration as the article suggests, it has the potential to snowball in network effects, giving other influential users one less reason to feel chained to a dumpster fire.
I thought the same. Now plataforms have a target audience to focus. The accounts move, the artists have to follow, the rest has a reason to move as well.
The suspension could have wide-reaching effects on pop culture globally.
Damn, real shame that.
Oh well.
The Great Shopping Mall of Alexandria
The Hanging Dumpsters of Babble-on
Honest quetion, what’s a stan account?
A stan is a highly devoted fan of a particular person, like a musician, actor, author or influencer. The term comes from a song by Eminem, and stans often interact on Twitter […]
From How To Geek.
Originally it was a portmanteau of “stalker-fan.” Think “super fan.”
It was actually a reference to Eminem’s song “Stan” about an insane fan who murders his family or something.
Let’s take that etymology one step further: “fan” comes from “fanatic”, so a stan is a stalker fanatic. Which somehow has become a positive term in some circles.
Ooooooohhh! I never made that connection.
Well, if they are smart they will just migrate to Bluesky.
I gave up on trying to get people to Mastodon.
Yeah it seems like most Brazilian twitter users have gone to bluesky. I’m glad that so few went to threads actually.
What’s the problem? They’re just not sure which instance to go with?
The problem is having instances. If you tell the average Joe to join Mastodon and they see there’s 10 different links for Mastodon they’ll just give up and move on, it’s too much complicated effort for them.
this is such a nonsense argument, people navigate email just fine despite every single platform sending emails from their own domain.
Sure but you have to remember people are not tech savvy at all. They’re used to email, but they do not see the correlation with the fediverse. Try explaining that to the average Joe and see where that leads you.
It sounds like nonsense to you but it is the reality. The medium person don’t bother and just want a place where you create an account and that’s it.
Yeah, I feel like this should be surmountable. At worst, you skip the whole concept of federation and just tell them exactly where to sign up.
and this is why i get so tired of people saying it’s bad to have a big instance like mastodon.social, like bro do you fucking want the platform to be successful or not? it seems like people just want a small isolated place to circlejerk each other rather than something globally useful.
Yeah, I don’t get that. Federation is the option to have a hyper-custom server that does weird things, or to make your own server with blackjack and hookers if you don’t like your current one, without losing access to community and content. Most people aren’t nerds, though, so if you want plag-and-play an instance like lemmy.world is great.
If you want a small bubble you actually don’t want federation.
Its the absolute lack of algorithm. No, really. I know Mastodon toots it as a feature, but without an algorithm to keep people scrolling most people just close the app and do something else. People who don’t understand instances would just go to mastodon.social anyway, but since no mastodon instance is actively trying to keep its users engaged 24/7, people naturally realize they have better things to do than to use social media all say.
Which is better for humanity, but bad for retention.
Its the absolute lack of algorithm
“It’s the absolute lack of a way to game the system with engagement bait and reward rage-posting”
Fixed that for you.
It’s not a matter for average users, it’s a matter for the people who farm engagement and post 300 times per day. Having a space that isn’t dominated by accounts like that is a good thing. It’s why Threads is such a miserable place. The algo there is aggressive and heavily rewards this kind of shit. Accounts like that provide no value and create toxic spaces full of rage and misinformation just to keep the waters churning and keep a constant flow of vapid “content”. It’s gross, and we are so much the better if we lose a ton of them.
From a content creator’s standpoint, sure. The issue is that when the end user doesn’t have a shiny new thing they’re interested in in front of them every 30 or so seconds they just log off and stop using the service. Why use mastodon if bluesky/threads/whatever shows them, generally, more of what they want to see and less of what they don’t?
Most people are using social media as a way to veg out and unwind these days. They don’t really care if somebody is able to game the system, just that they see more that lets them veg out (or alternatively makes them angry, driving increased engagement).
I agree that this is generally bad, but trying to sidestep it completely like Mastodon is is just going to result in a network that never hits the critical mass necessary to start exponential growth.
I would disagree. Bluesky has no algorithm and it’s growing quite rapidly. And I think that a large part of that is just having the people there that one might want to follow, and fosters community and conversation. A place like Threads absolutely does not do that. Mastodon is just an impenetrable mess from a UX perspective. The average user doesn’t care about federation and needs a solid and understandable entry point. Bluesky is federated but 90% of the people there have no idea what that means.
but trying to sidestep it completely like Mastodon is is just going to result in a network that never hits the critical mass necessary to start exponential growth
If keeping algo-gaming engagement bait off the platform is a price a platform has to pay, then I’m happily willing to accept that.
Bluesky has an algorithm
Mastodon is just an impenetrable mess from a UX perspective.
How does it compare to Lemmy?
Great, so the perverse incentives aren’t beatable then. Time to bug lawmakers, I guess?
On the bright side, Lemmy feels just about like Reddit to use, so that bodes well for us.
“The internet is the blue ‘e’ swirl thing on my computer’s home screen.”
Okay, so I’m going to tell you where the new Twitter is in the blue swirly.
I know, I know, easier said than done to actually guide them through, but if they’re at that level it’s just a different setting on the magic box.
I think there’s a cultural difference too. Bluesky is much closer to (a subsection of) twitter culture pre-musk than anything else. Weather you think that’s good or bad is a matter of taste but it is probably the easiest thing to get people who like pre-musk twitter to switch to.
And the fact that bluesky has many features mastodon does not. Namely, an algorithm.
It’s the instances as well as the fact that there’s no algorithm. You have to make your own feed. This means most people leave because there’s nothing keeping them engaged like other social media.
Like the “Come to Brazil!” comments on every music video or concert on youtube.
Why are they all Brazilian?
Hey I’ve had a couple chats with Taylor. She’s real nice. Cool to see her posted on lemmy.
