Most of my pain on Big Social has to do with relevancy algorithms. I have other pains, but this one is critical to me.

Basically, I just want to express myself. I want to express myself knowing that whatever I say gets a decent chance of being seen.

Now I don't think I'm owed an audience. However, I also want a fair shot—without having to impress an algorithm.

My biggest frustration with Big Social was the sense that eventually, I wasn't writing to express myself, nor was I writing to talk to people.

I was writing to impress an algorithm.

I didn't intend on impressing an algorithm. I never wanted to do that. But unconsciously, that happened as I continued to use Big Social.

The Fediverse alleviates my pain by virtue of having no relevancy algorithms.

Many times, I write stuff that nobody cares about. I'm fine with no one caring.

Why? Because that stuff nobody cares about has rightfully *earned* its lack of attention.

You know that dopamine shot people get when someone likes their posts?

The Fediverse gives me a dopamine shot when no one likes a post.

Big Social can't give me the dopamine shot of 0 likes because I know lack of interest isn't earned.

But I earn my 0 likes on the Fediverse—fair and square!

Last week, I bragged that a photo uploaded to Pixelfed had 0 likes.

A recent Twitter migrant was like, "I don't get it!"

It dawned on me—this achievement can't be explained until you experience a total lack of relevancy algorithms.

Now why do I enjoy "0 likes" on the Fediverse?

Because it's a reminder of something I have here that I can't have on Big Social: the ability to make something for its own sake, without regard for whether anyone likes it—my singular belief it deserves to exist.

I can't feel that way on Big Social because an algorithm decides what deserves to be seen.

What does an algorithm know about self-expression?

Now you all know what kind of pain Big Social causes me.

What about yours?