4 ms·

We use(d) G+ for our family, what would you suggest as a new home? I don't need a replacement for twitter, so I am not interested in mastodon, etc.

dredmorbius 8y ago
As we're taking a position as one of the information sources and leaders, the official position of G+MM / Plexodus is we do not recommend a specific site. We'll help point you at options though. For now, especially if you've not yet decided or explored: Go with something basic, tried, true, known, that works, and is stable. For groups, mailing lists, a blog (an excellent beacon site), wiki, groups tools (Google Groups, Yahoo Groups, Groups.io), or group-oriented discussions such as Reddit, are all excellent choices. Non-public destinations will hugely reduce your online visibility, and if your group depends on being findable, is probably not a good idea. This is only one of many criticisms which could be leveled against sites such as MeWe -- along with its closed, proprietary, financially questionable, and morally deplorable organisation, as well as a community that can only be classified as sick and dysfunctional. Bad communities tend to get worse. Actually, most communities tend to get worse. Really good ones will be watered down as they regress toward the mean. Facebook was once literally Harvard, something it no longer is. Bad ones will tend to drive off both exceptional, and eventually, typical/normal users. Only the die-hard misfits and sociopaths, or those with no other options, remain. This is much as is the case with physical-world communities as well. And if you want to dedicate yourself to being and remaining Harvard, you're going to have to accept the fact that you're not a node but a pipe -- a channel through which a large number of highly-selected members are recruited on a constant basis, and eventually graduate to other activities or sites (though with a retention of some as elders/teachers, and some ongoing alumni relations). This is effectively the university model, and can prove quite stable over time. There are other similar organisations -- militaries also operate on a constant-recruitment basis, as do some commercial firms. The pre-industrial city survived largely on in-migration, with greater financial opportunities, but also an often staggeringly short life-expectency on immigration. The difference between the university and pre-industrial city model is that the first improves and expands the options and opportunities of its recruits, the latter grins them up and spits them out. (See for example, Gregory Clark, A Farewell to Alms, or Ed Glaeser's works, on preindustrial urban experiences, demographics, life expectency, opportunity, etc.) Back to your question: "How should we choose?" is a FAQ: ∙ Discuss or research your contacts', friends' and associates' plans. Where your social group goes will be the most significant determinant, generally. ∙ Pick a site or platform that exists and is viable NOW. If at all possible, that has some years of proven history. ∙ Distinguish between "skin" and "bone" factors. It's the deep and integral features of a site, its bones, that have the biggest impact on its long-term trends. Topical skin elements, such as site layout, mobile app, etc., can be improved (if poor) or hide many deeper issues (if flashy). ∙ Consider the business, business model, trust, reliability, and community. These are all bone factors that can have tremendous impacts on a site or platform. They tend not to change radically, and rarely improve, if not currently good or viable. ∙ Preserve your future options. Decisions now that don't lock you into a single choice are likely best. ∙ Think of your own goals. What do you want or need to get out of your social media / online experience? Do you simply need private chat? Public visibility? Microblogging? Social networking? A full blog? Something more complex? Simple tools like SMS chat, instant messenger apps, email, RSS, and blogs remain surprisingly effective. ∙ Does the option give you control over your own data? Having to move your content, contacts, photos, and other online data is painful, slow, and possibly expensive. Insuring against having to do this again may be valuable. ∙ Privacy, cost, complexity, accessibility, and usefulness all deserve consideration. Think of what you care for and what you don't want. Add other concerns you may have. As you look at your goals, your circle's plans (or lack), the options, and what you do and don't want from them, you should find your options narrowing to a few possibilities. It's all but certain these won't address all your wants. But they should address basic needs and not present showstoppers. https://social.antefriguserat.de/index.php/FAQ#Q:_How_should_I.2Fwe_choose.3F https://social.antefriguserat.de/index.php/FAQ#Q:_How_should...

dredmorbius 8y ago

As we're taking a position as one of the information sources and leaders, the official position of G+MM / Plexodus is we do not recommend a specific site. We'll help point you at options though. For now, especially if you've not yet decided or explored: Go with something basic, tried, true, known, that works, and is stable. For groups, mailing lists, a blog (an excellent beacon site), wiki, groups tools (Google Groups, Yahoo Groups, Groups.io), or group-oriented discussions such as Reddit, are all excellent choices. Non-public destinations will hugely reduce your online visibility, and if your group depends on being findable, is probably not a good idea. This is only one of many criticisms which could be leveled against sites such as MeWe -- along with its closed, proprietary, financially questionable, and morally deplorable organisation, as well as a community that can only be classified as sick and dysfunctional. Bad communities tend to get worse. Actually, most communities tend to get worse. Really good ones will be watered down as they regress toward the mean. Facebook was once literally Harvard, something it no longer is. Bad ones will tend to drive off both exceptional, and eventually, typical/normal users. Only the die-hard misfits and sociopaths, or those with no other options, remain. This is much as is the case with physical-world communities as well. And if you want to dedicate yourself to being and remaining Harvard, you're going to have to accept the fact that you're not a node but a pipe -- a channel through which a large number of highly-selected members are recruited on a constant basis, and eventually graduate to other activities or sites (though with a retention of some as elders/teachers, and some ongoing alumni relations). This is effectively the university model, and can prove quite stable over time. There are other similar organisations -- militaries also operate on a constant-recruitment basis, as do some commercial firms. The pre-industrial city survived largely on in-migration, with greater financial opportunities, but also an often staggeringly short life-expectency on immigration. The difference between the university and pre-industrial city model is that the first improves and expands the options and opportunities of its recruits, the latter grins them up and spits them out. (See for example, Gregory Clark, A Farewell to Alms, or Ed Glaeser's works, on preindustrial urban experiences, demographics, life expectency, opportunity, etc.) Back to your question: "How should we choose?" is a FAQ: ∙ Discuss or research your contacts', friends' and associates' plans. Where your social group goes will be the most significant determinant, generally. ∙ Pick a site or platform that exists and is viable NOW. If at all possible, that has some years of proven history. ∙ Distinguish between "skin" and "bone" factors. It's the deep and integral features of a site, its bones, that have the biggest impact on its long-term trends. Topical skin elements, such as site layout, mobile app, etc., can be improved (if poor) or hide many deeper issues (if flashy). ∙ Consider the business, business model, trust, reliability, and community. These are all bone factors that can have tremendous impacts on a site or platform. They tend not to change radically, and rarely improve, if not currently good or viable. ∙ Preserve your future options. Decisions now that don't lock you into a single choice are likely best. ∙ Think of your own goals. What do you want or need to get out of your social media / online experience? Do you simply need private chat? Public visibility? Microblogging? Social networking? A full blog? Something more complex? Simple tools like SMS chat, instant messenger apps, email, RSS, and blogs remain surprisingly effective. ∙ Does the option give you control over your own data? Having to move your content, contacts, photos, and other online data is painful, slow, and possibly expensive. Insuring against having to do this again may be valuable. ∙ Privacy, cost, complexity, accessibility, and usefulness all deserve consideration. Think of what you care for and what you don't want. Add other concerns you may have. As you look at your goals, your circle's plans (or lack), the options, and what you do and don't want from them, you should find your options narrowing to a few possibilities. It's all but certain these won't address all your wants. But they should address basic needs and not present showstoppers. https://social.antefriguserat.de/index.php/FAQ#Q:_How_should_I.2Fwe_choose.3F https://social.antefriguserat.de/index.php/FAQ#Q:_How_should...