3 ms·

This forced recommended content is infuriating. It's the platform rudely getting in the way of the one purpose I want to use it for — staying up to date with th

This forced recommended content is infuriating. It's the platform rudely getting in the way of the one purpose I want to use it for — staying up to date with things happening in my followees' lives, with zero entertainment. Their promised ActivityPub support can't come soon enough.

oneeyedpigeon 3y ago
The irony being that it's twitter's use of the same that drives so many to seek alternatives. At least twitter has a 'following' feed, even if it's far from ideal.
molave 3y ago
Being active in an ActivityPub space lately, a bunch of folks there are very vocal against Threads being part of the ecosystem. They're confident Meta will Embrace, Extend, and Extinguish.
- timbit42 3y ago
  Also, a number of Mastodon servers already plan to block Threads' servers.
  - vitorgrs 3y ago
    Doesn't seem likely that mastodon.social will block it (and they are the largest)
notatoad 3y ago
it's not like they tricked you into using it, and then changed the algorithm to make it harder to "stay up to date with things happening in your followees lives". this is clearly not a platform that caters to that use case, so if that's what you want then you shouldn't use it. if you're infuriated because the entire world isn't designed to specifically cater to your expectations, you're going to spend a lot of time being infuriated
sethhochberg 3y ago
I’m sincerely asking: has any modern social media platform delivered this? I know it used to be that way on many sites, but over the last decade, we seem to really redefined the expectations. Personally, I’ve really come around to the idea. I follow a few baseball accounts - if an amazing highlight gets popular over on the LA Dodgers account, I want to see it without needing to trust the Mets might repost it or it’ll make the MLB’s accounts or whatever else. I don’t make a habit of following public entities like teams or brands or sports meme accounts, but sometimes they post things that really resonate with people who follow the accounts I do follow A big part of “social” is the buzz in your corner of the world, and recommendations help me be far more clued in
- StanislavPetrov 3y ago
  >I’m sincerely asking: has any modern social media platform delivered this? On Twitter you can simply select "following" instead of "for you" and all the tweets you see come exclusively from the people you follow, in chronological order. If I was forced to sift through the endless mounds of garbage recommended by Twitter (or any a social media company) there is a 0% chance I'd use it. >A big part of “social” is the buzz in your corner of the world, and recommendations help me be far more clued in I think the big question is, what does "social" mean to you? Personally I only want to see posts and messages from friends, people and organizations I proactively choose to follow. As long as I'm able to personally curate my own experience the toxic brew of e-celebs, SEO nonsense, advertisements and government/corporate propaganda of all kinds if almost entirely absent from my timeline. It may appeal to some people but it is absolutely repulsive to me (and others).

oneeyedpigeon 3y ago

The irony being that it's twitter's use of the same that drives so many to seek alternatives. At least twitter has a 'following' feed, even if it's far from ideal.

molave 3y ago

Being active in an ActivityPub space lately, a bunch of folks there are very vocal against Threads being part of the ecosystem. They're confident Meta will Embrace, Extend, and Extinguish.

timbit42 3y ago
Also, a number of Mastodon servers already plan to block Threads' servers.
- vitorgrs 3y ago
  Doesn't seem likely that mastodon.social will block it (and they are the largest)

notatoad 3y ago

it's not like they tricked you into using it, and then changed the algorithm to make it harder to "stay up to date with things happening in your followees lives". this is clearly not a platform that caters to that use case, so if that's what you want then you shouldn't use it. if you're infuriated because the entire world isn't designed to specifically cater to your expectations, you're going to spend a lot of time being infuriated

sethhochberg 3y ago

I’m sincerely asking: has any modern social media platform delivered this? I know it used to be that way on many sites, but over the last decade, we seem to really redefined the expectations. Personally, I’ve really come around to the idea. I follow a few baseball accounts - if an amazing highlight gets popular over on the LA Dodgers account, I want to see it without needing to trust the Mets might repost it or it’ll make the MLB’s accounts or whatever else. I don’t make a habit of following public entities like teams or brands or sports meme accounts, but sometimes they post things that really resonate with people who follow the accounts I do follow A big part of “social” is the buzz in your corner of the world, and recommendations help me be far more clued in

StanislavPetrov 3y ago
>I’m sincerely asking: has any modern social media platform delivered this? On Twitter you can simply select "following" instead of "for you" and all the tweets you see come exclusively from the people you follow, in chronological order. If I was forced to sift through the endless mounds of garbage recommended by Twitter (or any a social media company) there is a 0% chance I'd use it. >A big part of “social” is the buzz in your corner of the world, and recommendations help me be far more clued in I think the big question is, what does "social" mean to you? Personally I only want to see posts and messages from friends, people and organizations I proactively choose to follow. As long as I'm able to personally curate my own experience the toxic brew of e-celebs, SEO nonsense, advertisements and government/corporate propaganda of all kinds if almost entirely absent from my timeline. It may appeal to some people but it is absolutely repulsive to me (and others).