4 ms·

That’s a good question and it helps me think my way through how Bonfire (at least it’s website) makes me feel. I have long divorced myself from the consumption

That’s a good question and it helps me think my way through how Bonfire (at least it’s website) makes me feel. I have long divorced myself from the consumption of film, games and music; so when it’s understood that without the presentation of an emotional experience the appeal of these three things would effectively be neutralized, I’m fine with that. My observations are less targeted at software as an art form. I think it’s more about how it’s being marketed and what the effectiveness of a software’s marketing suggests about its targeted audience. I would be more interested in Bonfire if they had a plain web page that just said for example, “Bonfire is a social networking service that can communicate with the ActivityPub protocol and does X, Y, Z and we are working on W. We named it Bonfire because bonfires are like quaint parties but with a raging flame in the middle of it.” To summarize, maybe I prefer certain software that advertises itself plainly by its merits than…I guess more “psycho-social” sort of attributes?

ElevenLathe 4y ago
Interesting, I guess I can understand that approach for non-media-like software (not a great coining, but I mean things like operating system kernels, DBMS, batch accounting jobs, etc.). That said, I don't see the point of divorcing media-like software (by which I mean at least video games and social media, like Bonfire, and possibly other types of software) from its emotional content. Just as the entire point of a movie or a record is basically only its emotional content, the entire point of using social media software is the emotional content of the interactions with others, right? And, if the emotion is the point of the software, why is it out of bounds to advertise it with that slant? Movie trailers and novel jackets are entirely emotional in their language. Are those somehow bad or immoral? Or are you simply saying that emotional marketing of software isn't to your personal taste?
- the-printer 4y ago
  You’re pretty good at this. To chalk it up to personal taste almost undermines the deeper issues I want to bring up in regard to social media software, like how we’re doing so beautifully right now. Perhaps it’s out of bounds because it’s unrealistic. A social network is neither film nor novel. Maybe the issue is that we are talking about how software appeals emotionally to real people where they will engage in real communications with real consequences with the emotional appeal of movie trailers, video games and novels. Ironically the tone that the advertisement of Bonfire for example reminds me of is reminiscent of those fake ads from games like Fallout 3 or Bioshock. They’re almost employing the exact sort of rhetoric that people who try to make a world a better place before shoving everyone down tubes beneath the ocean and sticking needles in their arm use. Is it fair when a social network like Gab or Truth Social behaves the same way? Or is software with contrived emotional slants only acceptable when it appeals to your own personal views?
  - ElevenLathe 4y ago
    I guess I agree that social media apps are in principle very different from works of legacy media like movies or novels. Maybe this means we need to regulate the kinds of advertising they can do (as with cigarette ad regulation), but I kind of doubt that the specific tone of the Bonfire landing page is going to have a big impact on its adoption, which will presumably be socially-driven ("I want to see my friends' posts, and want them to see mine") like all similar apps have been.
- rambambram 4y ago
  > Just as the entire point of a movie or a record is basically only its emotional content, the entire point of using social media software is the emotional content of the interactions with others, right? Movies and social interactions carry emotions. Social media can (should?) carry social interactions, but why should social media itself be the source of emotions? Can it not be neutral in emotions and 'just' carry social interactions with emotions?
  - ElevenLathe 4y ago
    Certainly this might be a design goal of some social media apps, but IMO it definitionally cannot ever really be achieved. The software will put (some hard, some soft) limits on the kinds of things that will be posted, and the kinds of posts that will be seen. These choices will affect the emotional tenor of the experience of using it in a very directly McLuhan-y way. The closest thing we have to a neutral "common carrier" in social media -- if we stretch the definition of social media -- is probably email, but even the choices made there over its decades-long rollout have emotional consequences. Furthermore, the emotional content of checking my inbox on my phone in the waiting room at the tire shop is different than blasting through it with mutt on my Ubuntu desktop, and is different again when I log into my webmail quick on my parents' elderly Dell desktop. IMO if we try to pretend that there is a clear separation between the medium and the message, then in using these apps we open ourselves up to an even deeper level of emotional manipulation than using them with that truth in mind.
    - rambambram 4y ago
      > The software will put (some hard, some soft) limits on the kinds of things that will be posted, and the kinds of posts that will be seen. These choices will affect the emotional tenor of the experience of using it in a very directly McLuhan-y way. True. Being neutral is a nice goal, but unachievable. Every choice has a color, some dull, some bright, but colored nonetheless.

ElevenLathe 4y ago

Interesting, I guess I can understand that approach for non-media-like software (not a great coining, but I mean things like operating system kernels, DBMS, batch accounting jobs, etc.). That said, I don't see the point of divorcing media-like software (by which I mean at least video games and social media, like Bonfire, and possibly other types of software) from its emotional content. Just as the entire point of a movie or a record is basically only its emotional content, the entire point of using social media software is the emotional content of the interactions with others, right? And, if the emotion is the point of the software, why is it out of bounds to advertise it with that slant? Movie trailers and novel jackets are entirely emotional in their language. Are those somehow bad or immoral? Or are you simply saying that emotional marketing of software isn't to your personal taste?

the-printer 4y ago
You’re pretty good at this. To chalk it up to personal taste almost undermines the deeper issues I want to bring up in regard to social media software, like how we’re doing so beautifully right now. Perhaps it’s out of bounds because it’s unrealistic. A social network is neither film nor novel. Maybe the issue is that we are talking about how software appeals emotionally to real people where they will engage in real communications with real consequences with the emotional appeal of movie trailers, video games and novels. Ironically the tone that the advertisement of Bonfire for example reminds me of is reminiscent of those fake ads from games like Fallout 3 or Bioshock. They’re almost employing the exact sort of rhetoric that people who try to make a world a better place before shoving everyone down tubes beneath the ocean and sticking needles in their arm use. Is it fair when a social network like Gab or Truth Social behaves the same way? Or is software with contrived emotional slants only acceptable when it appeals to your own personal views?
- ElevenLathe 4y ago
  I guess I agree that social media apps are in principle very different from works of legacy media like movies or novels. Maybe this means we need to regulate the kinds of advertising they can do (as with cigarette ad regulation), but I kind of doubt that the specific tone of the Bonfire landing page is going to have a big impact on its adoption, which will presumably be socially-driven ("I want to see my friends' posts, and want them to see mine") like all similar apps have been.
rambambram 4y ago
> Just as the entire point of a movie or a record is basically only its emotional content, the entire point of using social media software is the emotional content of the interactions with others, right? Movies and social interactions carry emotions. Social media can (should?) carry social interactions, but why should social media itself be the source of emotions? Can it not be neutral in emotions and 'just' carry social interactions with emotions?
- ElevenLathe 4y ago
  Certainly this might be a design goal of some social media apps, but IMO it definitionally cannot ever really be achieved. The software will put (some hard, some soft) limits on the kinds of things that will be posted, and the kinds of posts that will be seen. These choices will affect the emotional tenor of the experience of using it in a very directly McLuhan-y way. The closest thing we have to a neutral "common carrier" in social media -- if we stretch the definition of social media -- is probably email, but even the choices made there over its decades-long rollout have emotional consequences. Furthermore, the emotional content of checking my inbox on my phone in the waiting room at the tire shop is different than blasting through it with mutt on my Ubuntu desktop, and is different again when I log into my webmail quick on my parents' elderly Dell desktop. IMO if we try to pretend that there is a clear separation between the medium and the message, then in using these apps we open ourselves up to an even deeper level of emotional manipulation than using them with that truth in mind.
  - rambambram 4y ago
    > The software will put (some hard, some soft) limits on the kinds of things that will be posted, and the kinds of posts that will be seen. These choices will affect the emotional tenor of the experience of using it in a very directly McLuhan-y way. True. Being neutral is a nice goal, but unachievable. Every choice has a color, some dull, some bright, but colored nonetheless.