4 ms·

> so that the network effects benefits Mastodon better I think this premise is incorrect. Not many people remember but in the first few months after the launch

by distcs 3y ago

> so that the network effects benefits Mastodon better I think this premise is incorrect. Not many people remember but in the first few months after the launch of Twitter, it used to be a nice place for geeks to hang out and share the next interesting hack they were working on. Then the network effects kicked in. Then celebrities came in. Then their followers came in. Twitter became a melting pot where every Tom and Harry now had a voice. Guess what that did to the platform. The place became full of noise, trolling, flame wars and spam. Why do we want network effects for every new social media? Can't we leave them small and homely?

linusg789 3y ago
I like the Fediverse just the way it is already. Not every social media network needs to be excessively popular.
redog 3y ago
Nothing stays simple or small and it all converges on monopolistic. A goal attained is no longer savory enough only by eliminating competition can flavor be restored /s
jasonvorhe 3y ago
Same. I don't want to see the Fediverse becoming just another influencer/thought leader/marketing drivel platform. We've had enough of that and I don't want to put the burden of supporting the needs of these actors on people who have to run instances out of their own pocket or by asking for donations. Let the Fediverse grow slowly and with input from its users and the people running instances. Growth shouldn't matter here, as long as it isn't stagnant.
fragmede 3y ago
I mean, you could comment on slashdot or your personal blog, but you chose to comment here. Why? I'm also commenting here, mind you, but part of the reason is the network effect. It's a spectrum, and somewhere between one person, all alone, shouting into the void, and drinking telepathically from the firehose of all human thought, there's a happy medium place that isn't too noisy but also doesn't feel empty and desolate. Small and homely is also tiny and dying, with no conversations. Look at Lobste.rs. Even if I had an account there, the lack of conversation - I don't know that I'd comment there at all.

by distcs 3y ago

linusg789 3y ago

I like the Fediverse just the way it is already. Not every social media network needs to be excessively popular.

redog 3y ago

Nothing stays simple or small and it all converges on monopolistic. A goal attained is no longer savory enough only by eliminating competition can flavor be restored /s

jasonvorhe 3y ago

Same. I don't want to see the Fediverse becoming just another influencer/thought leader/marketing drivel platform. We've had enough of that and I don't want to put the burden of supporting the needs of these actors on people who have to run instances out of their own pocket or by asking for donations. Let the Fediverse grow slowly and with input from its users and the people running instances. Growth shouldn't matter here, as long as it isn't stagnant.

fragmede 3y ago

I mean, you could comment on slashdot or your personal blog, but you chose to comment here. Why? I'm also commenting here, mind you, but part of the reason is the network effect. It's a spectrum, and somewhere between one person, all alone, shouting into the void, and drinking telepathically from the firehose of all human thought, there's a happy medium place that isn't too noisy but also doesn't feel empty and desolate. Small and homely is also tiny and dying, with no conversations. Look at Lobste.rs. Even if I had an account there, the lack of conversation - I don't know that I'd comment there at all.