I swear, we are still talking about this platform stuff all wrong. There is absolutely no comparison between my mastodon engagements and those anywhere else. People here are just far more interested in engaging people and ideas than any other site where the biggest activity seems to be following celebrity accounts and popular influencers discussing very little. It’s a completely different kind of experience.
@shoq Truth. Nothing compares to Mastodon in that regard. No big-shot idiot celebs being crammed down my throat, just...who and what hashtags I want to follow.
@jon404 And that may be one reason those celebs don’t connect here. They are used to one way interactions with an occasional joust with a reply guy or two. That just isn’t what tends to happen here. They may still get the audience, but it becomes clear they’re sort of grifting that audience, giving very little of themselves beyond their work product.
@shoq 100% this. Most of my output from my rare visits to Threads in the past few months has been words to the effect of, "WOW but this place is a toxic cesspit. I'll be over on Mastodon if you need me."
@shoq I'm glad to hear this. I just signed up, because X has gotten mean and nasty and I just want to connect with people and really engage on a level that creates real conversations.
@mike@MissTakenLee Thanks Mike. I like saying things that should be said. By someone. Anyone.
What I find most interesting is that despite some views to the contrary, it’s not the tech making the fediverse interesting. It’s all the people making a sustained effort to make it interesting.
@shoq@MissTakenLee Totally. The people are the point. The tech needs to be in service to the community rather than the other way around. I think this is what Elon and others often fail to understand.
In this respect, the fediverse model proves itself to me as far more likely to produce satisfying engagements. The big question is, do most users care enough to want that better experience. Without some new catalytic activity to entice and sustain them, I would doubt it.
@shoq It gives real usenet before the AOL merger vibes. I think this is almost entirely an artifact of mastodon bering perceived as "hard to use" during the first major twitter exodus. Its nice here because there's a selection bias for nerds.
@bckohan It wasn’t that hard to use, but for average consumers, it was still alien. Without a central onboarding server and experience, it just turned off more people than it turned on. JoinMastodon remedied some of that, but its value still remains murky for millions.
@shoq I think most users are mostly interested in being passive consumers of social media. We have generations trained on consuming television/magazines/newspapers without their interaction. I'm not sure that's ever going to change. Then again it's those interested in engaging are the ones who change the world (see my pinned Margaret Mead quote)
@lakelady I know the quote well. I’ve used it for years. And I agree. That’s part of what I mean by talking about it all wrong. Instead of looking for the big killer apps with mass appeal, we should be cultivating new kinds of highly targeted smaller apps that maximize engagement among only those who care about that.
> do most users care enough to want that better experience. Without some new catalytic activity to entice and sustain them, I would doubt it.
From my perspective it seems that this is the main rub with the Fedi. I see a lot of people trying to remake old networks instead of rejecting marketing and trying to build an online society that wants to exist.
Add comment