4 ms·
That would be more applicable if IRC had the broad appeal or ease of use of major social networks, however despite being around longer it has been repeatedly ec
by crowbahr 6y ago
That would be more applicable if IRC had the broad appeal or ease of use of major social networks, however despite being around longer it has been repeatedly eclipsed in user count by every contending service.
IRC has no power to shape national discourse, international politics or even quotidian humdrum discussion topics because it has a high barrier to entry, low user friendliness and no additional features.
Personally I wouldn't have it any other way: IRC is perfect as is, but it is not a social network that has ever gained enough steam to devolve. It's like saying your family blog has a great comment section, therefore all comments sections can be great without devolving: that's not even universally true for family blog comment sections.
- yiyus 6y agoI do not think the barrier to entry was so high. Some years ago (before facebook or even earlier), it was common to see all kind of people chatting in cybercafes, and also not so long ago in countries or places with poor connections. They either used some installed client or, most often, a web interface. And people could manage quite well, even non tech savvy people. But, except for that, I totally agree with your comment. It did never have the power that social networks have today, and as soon as more interesting tools were available, most people moved on.