What I've never understood about the echo chamber argument is the notion that it's merely an unstimulating exchange of views echoed back and forth that entails

What I've never understood about the echo chamber argument is the notion that it's merely an unstimulating exchange of views echoed back and forth that entails loss of social richness or complexity. The ways communities differ from each other depend on so many particularized variables, as different from each other as fingerprints. They can be stagnant, or they can be special, precisely because of their convergence on certain ideas & values. But that depends on the details, so the blanket charge of sameness feels intellectually lazy. And let's not forget that we're talking about addressing a specific set of problems: the whack-a-mole problem with bots & trolls, the problem of social cooling, the constant brand building, the bad faith arguing. Not wanting those very specific things still leaves wide open possibilities for how interaction can work within a community. If the desire to solves those problems look to you like a desire for an echo chamber, it might say a lot about the things you associate with normalcy.