4 ms·

For comparison, the old, dying, 'legacy' social media platform Facebook added 24MILLION new users in the same period. https://www.statista.com/statistics/26481

For comparison, the old, dying, 'legacy' social media platform Facebook added 24MILLION new users in the same period. https://www.statista.com/statistics/264810/number-of-monthly-active-facebook-users-worldwide/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/264810/number-of-monthly... To rub it in - If Facebook & Mastodon were the only two social networks to 'switch' to, FB captured 99.8% of the 'switchers'. If 24 Million new users had signed up for Mastodon, that would be a story. That only 0.2% of them chose Mastadon shows how bad the open, federated alternative really is.

411111111111111 4y ago
No, it doesn't show that it's bad. It only shows that basically nobody knows that they exist, which is basically a death sentence for social networks. Nonetheless, the distinction makes sense as otherwise you're just opening the doors to endless discussions about what is "better".
memish 4y ago
To add to that, how many did Twitter gain in that same period? There are people whose follower counts increased dramatically, which would suggest there was a large influx there too.
Kadin 4y ago
> Facebook added 24MILLION new users in the same period Of those 24M users, how many of them are people I care about or want to follow? I.e. not bots, not people on the other side of the planet, not people who don't have a language in common with me, etc. etc. A network with 10,000 users, 10% of whom are interesting enough for me to want to follow, is much better than a network with 1M users but only 0.1% are people I'd care to interact with.