> I guess this is their admission that you cannot monetize engagement if your community is highly toxic Heh funny I had the exact inverse assumption: that mayb

> I guess this is their admission that you cannot monetize engagement if your community is highly toxic Heh funny I had the exact inverse assumption: that maybe they realized single-minded attempts to monetize only engagement exacerbates toxic human behaviour. I'm thinking the truth is probably somewhere between both. > What I would enjoy would be a button to hide all the accounts that post more often than once per day. +1 on this thinking! But more vibing with the idea of imposed scarcity, rather that the hyper-customized view of the world. Related: I personally feel that more elements of consensus reality should play a role in our digital spaces, not each getting our own view just because we can have it. Just because we can fine-tune our reality to our preferences, that doesn't mean that's good for a system for its actors to do so highly. Imho there's a reason human minds generally all evolved to be mostly on the same page in terms of perceived reality (except for a few subtle knobs on some generally minor axes). And the neurotypes that break theses consensus reality rules are generally perceived as maladapted and tend to be ostracized (e.g. schizophrenia, barring value judgements about their treatment in society). I do believe there's an evolutionary lens to place over that vague shared sensibility (ie. what underlying feature of network dynamics did evolution "learn" and tune into?) and imho this all informs how we might build tech :)