191–200 of 246 posts
We can see this happening with Reddit. Either because they got fed up with the administration of the site, or were forcibly kicked off, a number of communities that were previously subreddits have branched off and made their own forums instead. Examples: https://rdrama.net https://ovarit.com https://patriots.win https://hexbear.net https://www.thefemaledatingstrategy.com/forum https://www.saidit.net/s/TumblrInAction
I found myself agreeing with every word of this article. The penultimate paragraph summarizes it well: > People call Twitter an indispensable public space because it’s the “town square”, but in the real world there isn’t just one town square, because there isn’t just one town. There are many. And the internet works when you can exit — when you can move to a different town if you don’t like the mayor or the local cult…
Same here. The biggest annoyance for me was whenever people use the “town square” analogy, especially as a Brit. The idea that my “town square” is owned by a private American company is a nightmare.
[0] https://www.mprnews.org/story/2015/12/22/protests-first-amen...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can already see that. If you think Twitter moderation is arbitrary or weird, clearly you haven't seen some of the popular Mastodon servers. Meet the new boss same as the old boss.
The difference, as the article mentions, is that you can just leave. You can follow the same content from another instance with other rules and not be effected by any of the weird laws on the main mastodon instance.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But these are all closed communities. I just think that it would be a point in having a community that is also searchable from google? Why is closed communities like Discord so popular?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discourse If you’re thinking closer to forum software of yore. If you don’t mind being centralized Reddit is what really killed forums and is still very good despite a drive to make it worse every year. There are many Reddit clones as well.
And that’s ignoring that phpbb/wordpress are insecure and need patching all the time.
> weirdos mad about video game journalism. Funny how being interested in accountability, transparency and good journalism makes you "a weirdo" worth ignoring. Oh well, if you're moderately effective about highlighting a problem you'll always get attacked with labels. Funny too how he lumps them and other groups with "Nazis". Feels like yet another person who is suddenly whining because their authoritarian websites ar…
Yes, that’s correct, because video game journalism literally doesn’t and can’t ever matter, so it doesn’t matter if it’s bad or not. Just like it doesn’t matter that tech gadget journalism or boat owner journalism is bad.
Hah. Good joke website gets the point across. I cannot connect to or load https://noahpinion.substack.com/p/the-internet-wants-to-be-f... from my comcast home IP. I can only load it by tunneling through one of my VPSes. Definitely fragmentation.
It’s extremely unlikely anyone is blocking Comcast.
I mostly agree with the author in that everyone shouldn't be on one platform and that yes, Twitter, Facebook, etc., aren't anywhere close to ideal sites for actually forming strong relationships and having good discussions. I also agree that the separation of internet self and real self has all but vanished from the internet, despite my own personal attempts to retain it. Additionally, as someone who has spent their…
That’s not how Reddit works. Different people use different subreddits, there is no “community”.
The default subreddits have the opposite problem; they are so popular there is no “community” because the users are everyone on earth. You’re pretty much just saying you don’t like “everyone on earth”.
Which is fair because they’re quite bad at posting; that’s why AskReddit’s #1 post is, every week, yet another gender war question/sex question like “men, what do you think about women’s armpits?” or something.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you re making the argument that people should stick to the mainstream of every medium (in this case the internet) because it's easy. That's why i called it lazy. I 'm not saying it's bad, but people shouldn't complain that everything looks alike, when they literally only stick to things that are alike forums are just as hard to find today, as they were before. In fact many of them are back in the places where…
I’m not saying they should stick to the mainstream, but I’m saying that a majority will . What has changed isn’t most people’s behavior, but the internet around them, and I’m arguing it’s changed for the worse.
The internet is in a feedback loop that both facilitated and is facilitated by this change.
The entire problem lies with the twisted motives of social media. They don't want to make you happy or feel good, they want money, at all costs which results in you being angry and toxic. I agree with this article in general, and think that its worth it to spend time arguing with people you care about rather some rando on twitter. community run communities will probably have a resurge, the problem is the tech barrier…
I agree that the incentives between users and social media don't align. However, there still would be none if there was an incentive for social media to "make users happy" or "make users feel good". As long as a single entity is in in a position to control the experience of all users (for example by deciding which timeline/suggestion algorithms are used) users have to keep track of how the incentive structure of that entity evolve. That means as a user, I want to own my interface to networks (so I get to choose e.g. suggestion algorithms). That's one of the cool things of the fediverse or email. By design, no single entity can make the user experience for all users strictly worse because there is no way to force adoption of something that goes against users incentives.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m not saying they should stick to the mainstream, but I’m saying that a majority will . What has changed isn’t most people’s behavior, but the internet around them, and I’m arguing it’s changed for the worse.
no, really people's behavior has changed. Did you care about your online profile in 2002 (if you were around?). Now people primarily care about how they are seen online The internet is in a feedback loop that both facilitated and is facilitated by this change.
And sure, people absolutely cared. That’s why AIM profiles were a thing, and why people were so excited when they could build web pages easily with Frontpage or Dreamweaver or with Angelfire or Geocities, etc.
What’s changed is arguably that it is less acceptable to be anonymous now, but the concept of wanting to share and be seen is not new.