3 ms·

> Secondly, I use Mastodon, and I'm on an instance with just over 1000 users. There are over 150K users on the main instance. For most people I know and follow

by fao_ 9y ago

> Secondly, I use Mastodon, and I'm on an instance with just over 1000 users. There are over 150K users on the main instance. For most people I know and follow, that's like, the low bar of twitter follower counts.

sp332 9y ago
Fortunately it's not related to follower counts. You can follow people from other instances.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
ColinWright 9y ago
While I acknowledge that numbers are numbers, to some extent, that's not really the point. If you find a Mastodon instance that has a community that's closely matched to your interests, suddenly that's 1K or 10K or 100K of high-quality followers. And the smaller instances don't suffer the Twitter firehose problem. The instances I use, I watch all the toots, not just those of people I follow. So it's not the number of followers that matters, per se, it's the number of people who see what you say. On Twitter that will only be your followers, but on Mastodon it's pretty much everyone on the instance (for the smaller instances). More, you can be followed by, and have your toots seen by, people on other instances. But my other point remains - there is no need to be exclusively on one or the other. It's comparatively trivial to put everything on both media. If you can do that, and you care about your audience (quantity and quality), why wouldn't you?
- fao_ 9y ago
  > that's not really the point. That's exactly the point though. If you put amount of people you are likely to reach above technical problems, then going solely to a service where the "high" follower count is 1/100th of the high follower counts on another is completely stupid. > But my other point remains - there is no need to be exclusively on one or the other. It's comparatively trivial to put everything on both media. Oh, I agree.
rhizome 9y ago
With or without bots?
dredmorbius 9y ago
See: Price's Law. User count isn't everything. Price's well-known square root law states that half of the literature on a subject will be contributed by the square root of the total number of authors publishing in that area.... https://www.researchgate.net/publication/222619181_Price%27s_square_root_law_Empirical_validity_and_relation_to_Lotka%27s_law https://www.researchgate.net/publication/222619181_Price%27s... Mastodon Monitoring Project https://mnm.social https://mnm.social https://dashboards.mnm.social https://dashboards.mnm.social Also: http://sp3r4z.fr/mastodon/general http://sp3r4z.fr/mastodon/general About 1.3 million users, 120m statuses (I believe that's cumulative). Twitter: https://www.statisticbrain.com/twitter-statistics/ https://www.statisticbrain.com/twitter-statistics/ ~700m users, ~340m active. 58m tweets/dy. I'd compare sqrt of both. That's ~1,100 vs 26,000 top users.

by fao_ 9y ago

sp332 9y ago

Fortunately it's not related to follower counts. You can follow people from other instances.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

ColinWright 9y ago

While I acknowledge that numbers are numbers, to some extent, that's not really the point. If you find a Mastodon instance that has a community that's closely matched to your interests, suddenly that's 1K or 10K or 100K of high-quality followers. And the smaller instances don't suffer the Twitter firehose problem. The instances I use, I watch all the toots, not just those of people I follow. So it's not the number of followers that matters, per se, it's the number of people who see what you say. On Twitter that will only be your followers, but on Mastodon it's pretty much everyone on the instance (for the smaller instances). More, you can be followed by, and have your toots seen by, people on other instances. But my other point remains - there is no need to be exclusively on one or the other. It's comparatively trivial to put everything on both media. If you can do that, and you care about your audience (quantity and quality), why wouldn't you?

fao_ 9y ago
> that's not really the point. That's exactly the point though. If you put amount of people you are likely to reach above technical problems, then going solely to a service where the "high" follower count is 1/100th of the high follower counts on another is completely stupid. > But my other point remains - there is no need to be exclusively on one or the other. It's comparatively trivial to put everything on both media. Oh, I agree.

rhizome 9y ago

With or without bots?

dredmorbius 9y ago

See: Price's Law. User count isn't everything. Price's well-known square root law states that half of the literature on a subject will be contributed by the square root of the total number of authors publishing in that area.... https://www.researchgate.net/publication/222619181_Price%27s_square_root_law_Empirical_validity_and_relation_to_Lotka%27s_law https://www.researchgate.net/publication/222619181_Price%27s... Mastodon Monitoring Project https://mnm.social https://mnm.social https://dashboards.mnm.social https://dashboards.mnm.social Also: http://sp3r4z.fr/mastodon/general http://sp3r4z.fr/mastodon/general About 1.3 million users, 120m statuses (I believe that's cumulative). Twitter: https://www.statisticbrain.com/twitter-statistics/ https://www.statisticbrain.com/twitter-statistics/ ~700m users, ~340m active. 58m tweets/dy. I'd compare sqrt of both. That's ~1,100 vs 26,000 top users.