4 ms·

Social networks ought to be less... social. Instead of text boxes, we should provide options for reactions and that's it. Maybe there are a lot of options, bu

Social networks ought to be less... social. Instead of text boxes, we should provide options for reactions and that's it. Maybe there are a lot of options, but the idea that anyone can share any thought at any time is probably too much. Limiting how people can interact and reward people for reacting positively, is a great 1/2 punch way to prevent the nastiest people from entering into a positive feedback loop. Yeah, it's not as free, but I think we've gathered enough evidence that freedom (in this social media context) causes more problems than it solves.

Jakobeha 6y ago
Your approach is actually used a lot. There are a lot of apps already out there which only allow you to communicate with reactions (e.g. Clash Royale). However, these reactions seem very artificial and impersonal. There is no real community, and you never feel like people are truly being "nice" to you because they might only be doing it for the in-game reward. Social media as is is already too impersonal, just reactions would make it worse. I think what we really need is exclusivity and accountability. So you can't just be messaged by random people, and if people messaging you are being assholes they will at minimum be kicked off your network. I think this is similar to how "real" friend groups work, how they worked before social media. The main problem is it's hard to find new people.
- TameAntelope 6y ago
  Yep, I saw how communication in M:tG Arena worked, and I thought about how much less toxic that community is, possibly as a result. There's still ways to troll, but they're limited and hard to cause any real trouble with. My problem with accountability is that it doesn't seem to matter. Facebook users have shown us that even linking terrible content back to real people won't stop the real people from sharing those terrible content. Anonymity (or its inverse) isn't the answer. Has anyone tried putting up a paywall to use comments? I feel like surely someone has, but I can't think of an org off the top of my head.
- TheRealNGenius 6y ago
  Just curious, what would be your take on reactions combined with text comments? I think that it would kind of be like giving a face to an otherwise impersonal comment, kind of like emoji. Not really sure though, currently experimenting on this kind of idea: https://www.wndr.xyz https://www.wndr.xyz
sneak 6y ago
Social interaction is not better facilitated by hobbling communication between parties.
- TameAntelope 6y ago
  Agreed! I don't think the goal should be to maximally facilitate social interaction anymore. We've proven there are enough bad actors that it poisons the well. So, given the above, how can we still enable some interaction? How can we get the value out of crowdsourcing without creating an opportunity for toxicity?
  - sneak 6y ago
    I don't think that bad actors are the problem you think they are. They still exist in our society and we manage. The issue in my view hinges upon making it easier for people to choose who they interact with online, including tools for delegating those decisions to zero or more third parties. We'll need a good decentralized identity system first.
    - TameAntelope 6y ago
      I think bad actors are the only problem worth talking about. Remove bad actors, and social media becomes a lot more tolerable/positive. The other problems with social media are either not important to most people, or solved by other services already.
amelius 6y ago
I think reactions can be text, but they shouldn't be shared with everybody by default. E.g. you post a picture, and I comment on it. Doesn't mean your mother should see the comment too.
- km3r 6y ago
  Interestingly, I used to use Instagram like this, only posting stories, and only reacting to others stories. It makes the interactions more personal and often spurs a nice private conversation.
gnicholas 6y ago
The problem with emoticons/reactions is that there's no way to indicate whether you are reacting to the linked item or your friend's commentary on it. For example, imagine your friend posts a link to a news story about RBG's death, commenting "so sad that RBG died, and now Trump gets to replace her". What would it mean to have a reaction of an angry face or +1 or thumbs-up? Does angry face mean you're angry at the news, or angry at your friend's reaction? Does +1 mean you agree with the news, or agree with your friend's reaction? Among close friends, it would be obvious most of the time. But most of our social media contacts are not close friends, and it's not clear what these reactions would mean.
TheRealNGenius 6y ago
Would you treat hackernews or reddit as social networks in the same sense? We have text boxes for comments, but I don't see nearly the same level of "cancel culture" that seems to happen on Twitter. I think that providing reactions is an interesting concept, perhaps this would pair well with text in providing additional context?

Jakobeha 6y ago

Your approach is actually used a lot. There are a lot of apps already out there which only allow you to communicate with reactions (e.g. Clash Royale). However, these reactions seem very artificial and impersonal. There is no real community, and you never feel like people are truly being "nice" to you because they might only be doing it for the in-game reward. Social media as is is already too impersonal, just reactions would make it worse. I think what we really need is exclusivity and accountability. So you can't just be messaged by random people, and if people messaging you are being assholes they will at minimum be kicked off your network. I think this is similar to how "real" friend groups work, how they worked before social media. The main problem is it's hard to find new people.

TameAntelope 6y ago
Yep, I saw how communication in M:tG Arena worked, and I thought about how much less toxic that community is, possibly as a result. There's still ways to troll, but they're limited and hard to cause any real trouble with. My problem with accountability is that it doesn't seem to matter. Facebook users have shown us that even linking terrible content back to real people won't stop the real people from sharing those terrible content. Anonymity (or its inverse) isn't the answer. Has anyone tried putting up a paywall to use comments? I feel like surely someone has, but I can't think of an org off the top of my head.
TheRealNGenius 6y ago
Just curious, what would be your take on reactions combined with text comments? I think that it would kind of be like giving a face to an otherwise impersonal comment, kind of like emoji. Not really sure though, currently experimenting on this kind of idea: https://www.wndr.xyz https://www.wndr.xyz

sneak 6y ago

Social interaction is not better facilitated by hobbling communication between parties.

TameAntelope 6y ago
Agreed! I don't think the goal should be to maximally facilitate social interaction anymore. We've proven there are enough bad actors that it poisons the well. So, given the above, how can we still enable some interaction? How can we get the value out of crowdsourcing without creating an opportunity for toxicity?
- sneak 6y ago
  I don't think that bad actors are the problem you think they are. They still exist in our society and we manage. The issue in my view hinges upon making it easier for people to choose who they interact with online, including tools for delegating those decisions to zero or more third parties. We'll need a good decentralized identity system first.
  - TameAntelope 6y ago
    I think bad actors are the only problem worth talking about. Remove bad actors, and social media becomes a lot more tolerable/positive. The other problems with social media are either not important to most people, or solved by other services already.

amelius 6y ago

I think reactions can be text, but they shouldn't be shared with everybody by default. E.g. you post a picture, and I comment on it. Doesn't mean your mother should see the comment too.

km3r 6y ago
Interestingly, I used to use Instagram like this, only posting stories, and only reacting to others stories. It makes the interactions more personal and often spurs a nice private conversation.

gnicholas 6y ago

The problem with emoticons/reactions is that there's no way to indicate whether you are reacting to the linked item or your friend's commentary on it. For example, imagine your friend posts a link to a news story about RBG's death, commenting "so sad that RBG died, and now Trump gets to replace her". What would it mean to have a reaction of an angry face or +1 or thumbs-up? Does angry face mean you're angry at the news, or angry at your friend's reaction? Does +1 mean you agree with the news, or agree with your friend's reaction? Among close friends, it would be obvious most of the time. But most of our social media contacts are not close friends, and it's not clear what these reactions would mean.

TheRealNGenius 6y ago

Would you treat hackernews or reddit as social networks in the same sense? We have text boxes for comments, but I don't see nearly the same level of "cancel culture" that seems to happen on Twitter. I think that providing reactions is an interesting concept, perhaps this would pair well with text in providing additional context?