3 ms·

That's a fair point (well, Twitter also has the mentioned ideological zealotry) but in this case, I think it's right to say that Mastodon also has it, in a diff

That's a fair point (well, Twitter also has the mentioned ideological zealotry) but in this case, I think it's right to say that Mastodon also has it, in a different way. Most Mastodon instances have stricter rules than other social media. Whether that is a good thing or not is up to you to decide, but the fact that they do have stricter rules based on their ideology/worldview is not contested. "Ideological zealotry" could also refer to the fact that usability problems are often excused with "but it's open source". Some people care about that, but not everyone does, and if Mastodon wants to attract Twitter users, they'll have to iron usability issues out because those users don't really care about whether something is open-source, they only care about whether it actually works smoothly.

SideburnsOfDoom 3y ago
> Most Mastodon instances have stricter rules than other social media. Mastodon instances might or might not have particular world-views and rules. That's not the same as "mastodon as a platform" has it. Instances are set up for all kinds of world-views. If some of those worldviews don't win out in the marketplace of ideas, that's still not zealotry. I think that there are things about those "stricter rules" that can be (but should not be) confused with "ideological zealotry" : the desire of moderators of those instances (moderators who do not have the resources of a large company behind them) to keep civility and not expose themselves to legal risk. And I think that there's also the lack of another common driver of zealotry: the drive for "engagement" even if via outrage, and thus profits to feed back to the VC. The absence of that in Mastodon could be confused with "a different, countervailing zealotry", but it is actually not that.
- soared 3y ago
  Mastodons home page: > Your home feed should be filled with what matters to you most, not what a corporation thinks you should see. Radically different social media, back in the hands of the people. This is ideologically zealotry compared to major platforms.
  - SideburnsOfDoom 3y ago
    > This is ideologically zealotry compared to major platforms. Only because our expectations have been so bent out of shape by "major platforms", thus unbending somewhat seems radical in comparison. The mere absence of "what major platforms do" is not IMHO in itself a zealotry.
    - Pannoniae 3y ago
      Most Mastodon instances openly ban views they don't like based on "find another instance if you don't like". Other social media also does this but to a lesser degree. The decentralisation also makes it so most places are horrible echo chambers with zero moderation oversight. Sure, I can find an instance which mostly agrees with my views but I don't find much value in "preaching to the choir"...
      - SideburnsOfDoom 3y ago
        I disagree entirely with the "horrible echo chamber" characterisation. It's usually code for something else. All you're telling me - if this accurately characterises yourself - is that your views are such that most people don't even want to hear them, let alone "mostly agrees with your views", and for once you are shamefully denied a captive audience because mastodon isn't a VC-funded outrage machine. Oh noe. Well, I'm quite happy with this state of affairs. Preach to your choir all you like, I'm sorry that your horrible views are very unpopular, but I don't have to care now. I have freedom of association, it won't arrive in my feed. Wontfix, works as designed.
        Pannoniae 3y ago
        I think you are being a bit hyperbolic. It's not that I have such extreme views that most (or even a significant) amount of people don't even want to hear them. It's the fact that in most spaces, there are quite a few silent taboos - things which aren't explicitly forbidden but pretty much get you an instant ban. I'm not that socially inept to not realise these things - but that's another thing you have to be mindful of. I also reject the "denied a captive audience" premise because other than HN, I don't really talk in other people's spaces. I have my discord server, that's where I talk most of the time. This is just my observation, it's not a personal grievance about being banned from some of the instances or whatever. That has never happened to me. Sure, Mastodon might work as designed - but I also have the right to disagree with how it works and tell other people my reasons for it. Also, please stop assuming my views are horrible. If you would like to learn more, we can have a chat (I'm fully aware that this offer will be declined; this is just a rhetorical device from my part), but if you don't care, it's only yourself to blame when your echo chamber implodes in a grotesque and macabre way.

SideburnsOfDoom 3y ago

> Most Mastodon instances have stricter rules than other social media. Mastodon instances might or might not have particular world-views and rules. That's not the same as "mastodon as a platform" has it. Instances are set up for all kinds of world-views. If some of those worldviews don't win out in the marketplace of ideas, that's still not zealotry. I think that there are things about those "stricter rules" that can be (but should not be) confused with "ideological zealotry" : the desire of moderators of those instances (moderators who do not have the resources of a large company behind them) to keep civility and not expose themselves to legal risk. And I think that there's also the lack of another common driver of zealotry: the drive for "engagement" even if via outrage, and thus profits to feed back to the VC. The absence of that in Mastodon could be confused with "a different, countervailing zealotry", but it is actually not that.

soared 3y ago
Mastodons home page: > Your home feed should be filled with what matters to you most, not what a corporation thinks you should see. Radically different social media, back in the hands of the people. This is ideologically zealotry compared to major platforms.
- SideburnsOfDoom 3y ago
  > This is ideologically zealotry compared to major platforms. Only because our expectations have been so bent out of shape by "major platforms", thus unbending somewhat seems radical in comparison. The mere absence of "what major platforms do" is not IMHO in itself a zealotry.
  - Pannoniae 3y ago
    Most Mastodon instances openly ban views they don't like based on "find another instance if you don't like". Other social media also does this but to a lesser degree. The decentralisation also makes it so most places are horrible echo chambers with zero moderation oversight. Sure, I can find an instance which mostly agrees with my views but I don't find much value in "preaching to the choir"...
    - SideburnsOfDoom 3y ago
      I disagree entirely with the "horrible echo chamber" characterisation. It's usually code for something else. All you're telling me - if this accurately characterises yourself - is that your views are such that most people don't even want to hear them, let alone "mostly agrees with your views", and for once you are shamefully denied a captive audience because mastodon isn't a VC-funded outrage machine. Oh noe. Well, I'm quite happy with this state of affairs. Preach to your choir all you like, I'm sorry that your horrible views are very unpopular, but I don't have to care now. I have freedom of association, it won't arrive in my feed. Wontfix, works as designed.
      - Pannoniae 3y ago
        I think you are being a bit hyperbolic. It's not that I have such extreme views that most (or even a significant) amount of people don't even want to hear them. It's the fact that in most spaces, there are quite a few silent taboos - things which aren't explicitly forbidden but pretty much get you an instant ban. I'm not that socially inept to not realise these things - but that's another thing you have to be mindful of. I also reject the "denied a captive audience" premise because other than HN, I don't really talk in other people's spaces. I have my discord server, that's where I talk most of the time. This is just my observation, it's not a personal grievance about being banned from some of the instances or whatever. That has never happened to me. Sure, Mastodon might work as designed - but I also have the right to disagree with how it works and tell other people my reasons for it. Also, please stop assuming my views are horrible. If you would like to learn more, we can have a chat (I'm fully aware that this offer will be declined; this is just a rhetorical device from my part), but if you don't care, it's only yourself to blame when your echo chamber implodes in a grotesque and macabre way.