2 ms·
> I do think Bluesky may have chose the wrong launch strategy by using the old and tired invite-only method. But hard to say for sure. Hard to say indeed. I'm
by roenxi 3y ago
> I do think Bluesky may have chose the wrong launch strategy by using the old and tired invite-only method. But hard to say for sure.
Hard to say indeed. I'm not sure how a social network bootstrap method can get "old and tired" either - humans don't change how they socialise that quickly!
Facebook achieved remarkable things by starting in the Ivy League community then branching out, it really stands as a fascinating example of how curating the early community is critical in the bootstrapping process for a social network. I'm happy to bet that there is a 0.01 to 1% of the population who actually matters for getting groups of people to use something, and if a social network manages to find them then it will succeed, invites or not.
It could be that there is too much dross out there for free for all signups early on. To me it looks like a core community should be established first.
- SkyMarshal 3y ago> Hard to say indeed. I'm not sure how a social network bootstrap method can get "old and tired" either - humans don't change how they socialise that quickly! But they do get wise to things like false scarcity of digital goods or artificial gatekeeping, and it puts them off. When a strategy is no longer novel or original, its loses its effect. Yes that early core community can really set the tone for a long time, and may have been worth it. On the other hand, an even bigger risk to a social network is not getting enough community to cause positive feedback effects and organic hockey-stick user growth. Failure to launch. Especially with a glut of social media competitors crowding the landscape.