3 ms·

Low quality responses aren't a part of a discussion: they're simply to be ignored. This is part and parcel for the internet, everywhere and for everyone. Unless

Low quality responses aren't a part of a discussion: they're simply to be ignored. This is part and parcel for the internet, everywhere and for everyone. Unless one chooses not to ignore them, but that's their specific choice to participate. Where exactly is there "quality of discussion", if we include low quality responses in that rating, in any political space that isn't siloed? It doesn't exist today, and if the space is siloed then it also doesn't exist by definition. It's okay to want to go where people agree with you more, even if it's because others aren't allowed in. But call it what it is, and note what it isn't.

rsynnott 2y ago
> Low quality responses aren't a part of a discussion: they're simply to be ignored. This is part and parcel for the internet, everywhere and for everyone. Cool. Twitter has made this much more difficult, by (a) embracing a pay-for-attention model, where bluetick replies, which are rarely worth looking at, are artificially promoted and (b) by making mass-blocking far more difficult (through the death of the API). So, people are sensibly going to Bluesky, which provides a better product, with sensible, choosable reply prioritisation, and a first-party blocklist system. Like a big part of what's going on here is that Twitter is a way worse product than it used to be, while on the other hand better competing products exist in a way that they did not before. It's pretty natural under those circumstances that people go from the bad product to the good product. This is, broadly, how most dead social networks have died, both those which actively made themselves worse (livejournal, Digg, Tumblr), and those which were merely overtaken (Friendster, Myspace, Slashdot).
- mrangle 2y ago
  It's not difficult to ignore people. There are still a lot of (bluecheck) Leftists on X, and people successfully practice ignoring their version of terrible posting just as much as can be done in the other direction. Looking forward to monitoring the "death of twitter" and the victory of bluesky.
  - yyuugg 2y ago
    I'd be shocked to see a leftist still on Twitter, tbh. I'm sure there are plenty of Liberals, but I doubt there are many Leftists.
    - mrangle 2y ago
      There are masses of Leftists on X. Recently all seemingly intent on placing themselves on all manner of watchlist via psychotically celebrating and supporting the murder of a CEO, utilizing the logic of people with actual brain damage. I'm sure that Bluesky was having a normal one!
  - rsynnott 2y ago
    The way that Twitter currently ranks replies, all the top replies will be from blueticks, and thus generally low-quality nonsense or outright spam (a lot of people seem to be using it for self-promotion, which is perhaps unsurprising given the nature of pay-for-attention). For a post with any significant engagement, this makes ignoring them a lot of work. Many people may find a platform where this isn't a thing attractive. Like, Twitter is clearly _worse_ with promotion of bluetick replies than it was without it; I don't think that's really controversial. That gives platforms which do not do that an advantage. Do I think Twitter is outright unusable in its current state? No, though it's getting there. But it's certainly way more _unpleasant_ to use than it used to be, and increasingly viable alternatives exist, so it's unclear to me why you'd expect people to bother using Twitter.
    - mrangle 2y ago
      Lots of people will variously find any one platform unusable, at any given point. That you and others find X unusable isn't remarkable. For every person that mirrors your sentiment, there is someone who doesn't. And then the same would hold for your opinion about the relative usability of other platforms. It's unclear to me why you'd expect "people" (in quotes bc using that word to encompass everyone is strange in this context) to not use X and to be more approving of other platforms. Last, its unlikely that any platform that primarily exists as a response to another platform will ever have a primary use as anything else. For example, Bluesky's future is likely only to be as a protest platform contra X. This is its identity that it will have difficulty shedding.

rsynnott 2y ago

> Low quality responses aren't a part of a discussion: they're simply to be ignored. This is part and parcel for the internet, everywhere and for everyone. Cool. Twitter has made this much more difficult, by (a) embracing a pay-for-attention model, where bluetick replies, which are rarely worth looking at, are artificially promoted and (b) by making mass-blocking far more difficult (through the death of the API). So, people are sensibly going to Bluesky, which provides a better product, with sensible, choosable reply prioritisation, and a first-party blocklist system. Like a big part of what's going on here is that Twitter is a way worse product than it used to be, while on the other hand better competing products exist in a way that they did not before. It's pretty natural under those circumstances that people go from the bad product to the good product. This is, broadly, how most dead social networks have died, both those which actively made themselves worse (livejournal, Digg, Tumblr), and those which were merely overtaken (Friendster, Myspace, Slashdot).

mrangle 2y ago
It's not difficult to ignore people. There are still a lot of (bluecheck) Leftists on X, and people successfully practice ignoring their version of terrible posting just as much as can be done in the other direction. Looking forward to monitoring the "death of twitter" and the victory of bluesky.
- yyuugg 2y ago
  I'd be shocked to see a leftist still on Twitter, tbh. I'm sure there are plenty of Liberals, but I doubt there are many Leftists.
  - mrangle 2y ago
    There are masses of Leftists on X. Recently all seemingly intent on placing themselves on all manner of watchlist via psychotically celebrating and supporting the murder of a CEO, utilizing the logic of people with actual brain damage. I'm sure that Bluesky was having a normal one!
- rsynnott 2y ago
  The way that Twitter currently ranks replies, all the top replies will be from blueticks, and thus generally low-quality nonsense or outright spam (a lot of people seem to be using it for self-promotion, which is perhaps unsurprising given the nature of pay-for-attention). For a post with any significant engagement, this makes ignoring them a lot of work. Many people may find a platform where this isn't a thing attractive. Like, Twitter is clearly _worse_ with promotion of bluetick replies than it was without it; I don't think that's really controversial. That gives platforms which do not do that an advantage. Do I think Twitter is outright unusable in its current state? No, though it's getting there. But it's certainly way more _unpleasant_ to use than it used to be, and increasingly viable alternatives exist, so it's unclear to me why you'd expect people to bother using Twitter.
  - mrangle 2y ago
    Lots of people will variously find any one platform unusable, at any given point. That you and others find X unusable isn't remarkable. For every person that mirrors your sentiment, there is someone who doesn't. And then the same would hold for your opinion about the relative usability of other platforms. It's unclear to me why you'd expect "people" (in quotes bc using that word to encompass everyone is strange in this context) to not use X and to be more approving of other platforms. Last, its unlikely that any platform that primarily exists as a response to another platform will ever have a primary use as anything else. For example, Bluesky's future is likely only to be as a protest platform contra X. This is its identity that it will have difficulty shedding.