@mmasnick done by far the best job of chronicling the Twitter/Musk follies and the resulting social media diaspora. His 6-months-later piece, on where we stand in what I hope will be a massive move to decentralized networking, is a must-read: https://www.techdirt.com/2023/04/28/six-months-in-thoughts-on-the-current-post-twitter-diaspora-options/
Six Months In: Thoughts On The Current Post-Twitter Diaspora Options

Today is six months since Elon took over Twitter and began this bizarre speedrun of the content moderation learning curve in which he seems to repeatedly… not learn a damn thing. Over and over agai…

Techdirt

@dangillmor @mmasnick I know it makes me finicky, but:

1) boilerplate EULA terms
2) minimal moderation capability
3) no block feature, then rushed out block feature

Suggest to me that Bluesky really is ill-prepared to run a social network. They're going down the usual techbro path of putting 45% effort into engineering, 45% effort into looking cool for a handful of investors, 10% effort into solving known difficult problems of products like theirs.

@maxkennerly @dangillmor that's incorrect. If they didn't have plans to fix all that you'd have a point. But they did all this with plans to fix things. It's a question of timing. They haven't launched yet (only beta testing) because they knew all along that they need these things for launch. Very different from "tech bros" who just don't know any better. The Bluesky team actually understands this stuff.

@mmasnick @dangillmor Sure, Bluesky has a plan for moderation: the 'community' will do it, via server-level moderation and third-party 'community labeling' and so forth.

Which is a plan, I suppose, but it's not operational. Their primary moderation method is not even alpha testing yet. If it's true they know what they're doing, then the takeaway is they don't really care about moderation at all, it's an afterthought.

https://blueskyweb.xyz/blog/4-13-2023-moderation

Composable Moderation

@mmasnick @maxkennerly @dangillmor Based on the Matthew Yglesias incident, the real #Bluesky moderation policy is Bluesky will ban people who annoy the #elite social media people they want to post on their platform. This isn’t a bad business decision - in fact I would say it’s a good business decision because it makes moderation a lot easier. But it’s unsurprising the non-elite would hate such a policy.
@maxkennerly @mmasnick @dangillmor i absolutely want nothing to do with BlueSky amother platform for bots, white supremacists and NeoNazis to thrive
@hedgehogerb @maxkennerly @dangillmor what? They have been booting the few neonazis who got in.
@maxkennerly @dangillmor not having everything ready to go *pre-launch* is very different than not caring about moderation. This is disingenuous and you know it.

@mmasnick @maxkennerly @dangillmor moderation and blocking are MVP features for a social media app these days, since we all know that they are critical to a successful platform

I would say that their beta is premature from a technical perspective and looks like a FOMO marketing stunt

@mmasnick @maxkennerly @dangillmor yeah, I think you are wrong, too.

I'm not sniffing around for the next great social network, so I have a particular bias against hype

@RandomDamage @maxkennerly @dangillmor yeah. Don't go on it yet. No one's asking you to. I'm just telling you your assumptions are wrong. But it's cool. Stay away

@mmasnick @maxkennerly @dangillmor don't worry, I will.

It's clearly not ready yet, which is exactly what I said

@mmasnick @maxkennerly @dangillmor even if their plan was in action, its an invitation for brigading and abuse. Rely on people reporting and training the AI? Garbage in, garbage out.
@mmasnick @dangillmor I don't think it's disingenuous to point out that Bluesky (1) isn't ready for moderation at scale and (2) likely won't be ready for moderation at scale anytime soon.
Erin Conroy (@[email protected])

Attached: 1 image Dorsey will be happy with one arm of #Bluesky being used by his advisor Ali Alexander to plan the next armed Proud Boys/GOP attack on the Capitol building - and the other arm being used by you to fruitlessly bemoan SCOTUS corruption & the New Jim Crow voting restrictions, & what he & Musk undoubtedly delight, behind closed doors, in referring to as "woke nonsense." The $ & power asymmetry makes this work for the GOP. No content moderation means no pesky Congressional hearings for him & Musk.

Mastodon progressives
@maxkennerly @dangillmor are you talking about the protocol or the service? Because that's the part people keep confusing.
@mmasnick @maxkennerly @dangillmor When there's only one service on the protocol, what exactly is the distinction?
@LouisIngenthron @maxkennerly @dangillmor the question is what are they building? Because that drives the decision making. People are assuming the choices were made out of ignorance rather than with a larger goal in mind.
@mmasnick @maxkennerly @dangillmor I wish projects I worked on were given such a benefit of the doubt.
@LouisIngenthron @maxkennerly @dangillmor ok. The point here is simply that the Bluesky team has been very public about its plans. And people act as if they're winging it. That's the part that is frustrating
@mmasnick @LouisIngenthron @maxkennerly @dangillmor ignorance and larger goals are not mutually exclusive, they're often the same thing.

We know that a major part of the underlying intentions of Dorsey et al are to try and make a social network that's out of reach of over-bearing governments. This is a noble goal.

I'm cool with giving everyone free speech, even the bad guys. Everyone knows that when governments create rules to target the bad guys, they eventually start using them against the good guys too. So as much as this might piss people on the left off, you kinda have to protect fascist's right, or at least their ability to publish, if you want environmentalists to also keep that ability.

The problem is that their approach to how individuals curate their own experience on bluesky is based on a misunderstanding of what censorship actually is.

People have a right to speak, but people also have a right to not listen.

In the minds of the long termists, decisions like no instance level blocking and forcing users to publicise their personal blocklists are to discourage and to put a black mark against those who would censor others.

In reality, the individual or even a group of individuals choosing not to listen to certain people is not actually what censorship is, and these devices and design patterns which bluesky think are encouraging open debate are actually painting a target on vulnerable people who are under no obligation to listen to fascists whether they have a right to speak or not.

@mmasnick @maxkennerly @dangillmor Isn't a crucial part of Bluesky's USP the fact that you don't need to understand the difference between the protocol and the service? Especially compared to Mastodon?

There's a major issue of trust here that is coloring the argument. From your posts, I infer that you trust Bluesky to act in its users' best interests and to rapidly fix what other people say are dealbreaking flaws.

If you're more skeptical, you get to a different argument pretty quickly.

@edbott @maxkennerly @dangillmor I trust them to make a protocol in which we don't have to trust *them* and can trust others if we don't.