Lotta talk about replacing Twitter.
The better dialogue is how to get people to re-evaluate how they engage with the internet.
Personally, I'm convinced of two things:
- You can't 1:1 replace Twitter unless it's a similar top-down walled garden.
- Most people probably shouldn't want a Twitter replacement, since Twitter is bad for us.
Instead of finding/molding/creating a replacement, we should encourage people (and ourselves!) to focus on what they like most about internet interaction.
Re: "Twitter is bad for us"
Most people only know to engage with the internet via the primary monoliths; Facebook, Twitter, etc. Anyone who's been active online before those platforms existed knows much better on how high-quality an online community can be.
Look at Reddit. The large subreddits are broadly cesspools; they're more targeted by spams/trolls/brigades, they attract the worst actors, and they're much harder to moderate effectively.
The small subreddits are often excellent communities, since they don't attract the nonsense, and can be moderated more effectively just because the numbers are lower.
So many people can't even begin to grasp this because all they know about online interaction is their experience with the top-down walled gardens.
The monoliths can exist, but using them exclusively (which most people do!) just feed a bunch of garbage into your brain.
It's the equivalent of having only eaten fast food when you eat out. It sucks but if it's all you know, it's still food you didn't have to cook yourself so cool. But there's much better food out there with some effort!
@thatianelliott 100%. My perspective is absolutely narrow.
Just to frame my thoughts perfectly though: Twitter was good. Something like Twitter can be good. Twitter is/has been/will be less good, if not bad.
The main bads are: less security/stability/moderation due to reduced staff (and Ellie's whims), higher propensity to scams due to verification meaning nothing, and more toxicity than ever before.
Still very possible to find something good in that, just...harder.
@chrisabides @thatianelliott Good and Bad Things both surface organically when you throw a bunch of people together.
But how we deal with Bad Things determines how sustainable the environment is for Good Things.
I feel like it’s somehow worse that the big platforms have slowly degraded to their current state. The worst things are usually dealt with, leaving a lot of questionable middle ground that slowly wears you down.
If you’re lucky, one day you wake up and go, “You know what? This isn’t what I signed on for.”
@chrisabides @thatianelliott I think this still happens with smaller communities, but there’s not as much pulling you in to engage even when you aren’t in the right frame of mind to.
Healthy communities have people come and go all the time as their priorities change.
It breaks my heart that most people only experience the internet only via the monolithic sites and apps.
It's criminal that some devices are sold that can only access the parts of the internet that the device maker can monetise.
I'm still optimistic though, I am still a member of a web based bulletin board from the 90s that has stood the test of time!
@danielfalk I have a literal ton to say about this; I'll try to be brief.
I think the nature of Twitter, or any "town square" kind of site is that it'll always be used by bad actors for mis/disinformation, brigading, harassment, etc. And those negatives should probably outweigh the positives (ease of use, simplicity) for most people.
Sites like Twitter can exist, but for many people they're the only way they engage with the internet, and frankly the internet has much better communities and experiences than Twitter.
@dcsohl On a mass scale I don't think we know yet.
Smaller communities are always better in regards to quality interaction. Look at Reddit; huge subreddits are cesspools, but the smaller ones get better moderation, less spam, etc. So many people don't know or see this (and why would they; so many people's only interaction with the internet is just the major sites, they never learned to branch out or explore since they never had to).
@chrisabides I suspect when most people talk about "replacing twitter" they implicitly mean "replacing my experience of twitter, which really means the people I follow and interact with".
If people could get the feeds they care about on masto, we wouldn't be having these convos.
@chrisabides I think I agree, its hard to imagine brands and celebs here -- they just won't get the same positive feedback in terms of followers and such. If all you want is brands and celebs, probably just stay there ...
Heck, it would be fine with me if twitter devolved into a place I tweet at @DeltaAssist when I'm annoyed at something while flying
@thornbill9 I would argue that mobilization is likely easier on decentralized platforms, since they won't be subject to the monolith's whims, or the monolith's responses to govt pressure.
Regarding new perspectives; I agree. There's an inverse to that though; Twitter/FB have also been hotbeds of the spreading of extremist views that normally wouldn't have found purchase on smaller, better-moderated platforms.
@bellesapepper_37 My condemnation of Twitter/FB "walled gardens" is less about the medium itself and more about how they've evolved (which is predictable since they're for-profit companies).
Like, FB and Twitter were absolutely good websites once upon a time. But algorithms, mismanagement, and poor moderation policy have made both places toxic and awful.
Now, a marginalized voice can be heard on Twitter, but it'll be dogpiled by extremist voices since the site's been leveraged more in favor of bad actors.
@bellesapepper_37 I didn't see it that way. Gives me a lot to think about; thank you.
What would you suggest people do? Advocate for a new central platform? Try to reform Twitter?
@bellesapepper_37 I'm in a state full of sundown towns. Well aware, despite not being on the receiving end of bigotry.
I think this is actually a good idea; don't abandon Twitter, and even if you don't like it, cultivate your feed to include marginalized voices and throw out retweets with abandon, just to signal-boost those who need it. Maybe not everyone has time to do that, but I probably do.
@chrisabides Thanks, and thank you for the follow back.
Did you see that faaw antifa report tfg Gizmodo article?
@chrisabides yes! This makes so much sense.
I'm really taking this situation to re-think how I use social media, and to not spend so much time consuming. Instead, focusing more on interacting with people but also just not being on social so much.
It's easy to fall into the constant scroll, but far more rewarding to get to know people, and also put your phone down and do something else ☺️
"The better dialogue is how to get people to re-evaluate how they engage with the internet."
This.
@chrisabides I totally agree.
And if I may add:
The #Fediverse is not a replacement, which would mean we're aiming or looking forward for non-Fediverse platforms to die. Which will probably not happen.
The Fediverse is also not a clone. Many try the Fediverse with this mindset and gets disappointed because their expectations were not met.
The Fediverse is also not an alternative because it is a protocol. It's more than what it is compared to. More than Twitter, more than Facebook.
Rob Yurkowski (he/him)
Christopher
Noel French
Jamie Baker Roskie
sj_zero
Ian Elliott
Nicholas Bering
Jimothy 🐢
fbievan (Powered by Pizza)
Kathy Gori
Eric Strong, MD
Jerry 🦙💝🦙
Spencer Dailey
danielfalk
Dave Wakeman
MichNazzLCN
Justan Peterson
Daniel Sohl
RadioSilence
Blair MacIntyre
resipiscent
Louise Locock
Thornbill9
👀's Belle
kevlar
kae, by the ocean
Barry
Quinn the Human
Stephanie Ward
Brent Logan
MFTech
♾️ Yuki (스노 雪亮) 🐬 🦣
Lavinia
shadownlite
Tom Marsland 
Maryann 🌻
Yaw
Daniela Quirke
Ekinnajay 🇧🇻🇺🇸
bob 
quickgate