Dan GoodinIt should be clear now that it was and remains a catastrophic mistake for people to view privately owned social media platforms as any kind of public resource. People didn't know better a decade ago. They have no excuse now.
Bruno Nicoletti@dangoodin I’d go further and say _any_ automated platform that relies on advertising for revenue will always end up deeply enshitified as they have to chase “engagement”. And what engages most is outrage. So we end up with systems, that by design, drag you further and further in the world of grift and crazies.
Jo - pièce de résistance@bjn @dangoodin
I have to strongly disagree about what engages most. If Mastodon is a platform without that variable...then I can confidently say my most popular posts are just posts about beautiful things. I get the most boosts, likes, comments, etc. on really nice things most.
But I was throttled first by ad-based social media and that is how they get you to dance for the devil to get seen and they groom and channel the outrage type of engagement, rather than the joyful kind.
b4ux1t3 
#1️⃣@JoBlakely @bjn @dangoodin it's a pretty well-documented bit of psychology that folks are more likely to engage with outrage/negativity than the alternatives.
I'm not saying it's always true for everyone, but the sheer success of that kind of content speaks to the general truth of that psychology.
Edit: and it could well be that the atmosphere of the fediverse is leading to a difference here. I, too, get a lot of engagement on positivity and beauty.
@b4ux1t3
What were they comparing it to? What is the 'test'? It is just presumption and commentary and I don't think the studies are worth shit scientifically. I want to know their parameters.
Are they only comparing one oligarch blood sucking social media platform to another?
Did they look through history?
Sure when important things are going on, people are going to be upset and have things to say, but it's not what people like to engage with. It may be what some must.
@JoBlakely I mean, it's not just in the context of social media.
DOI Numbers:
10.1037/0033-2909.134.3.383 - Not All Emotions Are Created Equal: The Negativity Bias in
Social–Emotional Development, 2008
10.1037/1089-2680.5.4.323 - Bad is stronger than good, 2001
10.1002/ejsp.2420220502 - Positive-negative asymmetry or "When the heart needs a reason", 1992
This concept of a negativity bias goes back much further than digital social media does.
@JoBlakely again (sorry for the rapid messages), it's a strong possibility that the (well-documented) negativity bias of individuals can be offset by things like level of education, emotional upbringing, societal norms where they live.
I'm not debating that it's the _only_ force at play here, I'm just pointing out that there is very strong evidence that many, of not most, people are better engaged by negativity than by positivity.
@JoBlakely I make it a point to not engage with negativity unless I think it's genuine or important that I do. And I did that before I learned about the psychological bias.
But you and I are an n of 2. :D