mccNov 23, 2024

I like having Bluesky because it is a non-Twitter, non-Facebook space where I can hear from all my friends who are unable or unwilling to use Mastodon (a site with real barriers to entry). I haven't talked to a lot of those folks much since 2022 and I missed them.

I have intricate arguments why Bluesky is the wrong technical model for a distributed social network. But if a person has already decided *for nontechnical reasons* that they aren't using Mastodon, those arguments mean nothing to them

Show threadmccNov 23, 2024

There is a lot of Bluesky negativity on Mastodon and like, I am actually pretty negative on Bluesky?, but sometimes the negativity expands into attacking *Bluesky users* for making a Bad and Wrong decision, and not only is this mean¹, I feel like almost all of *those* critiques are deeply failing at empathetic imagination. You have to consider the Bluesky user's choice from *their perspective*.

¹ Sometimes being mean to a person is an ineffective way of convincing them to change their mind.

Show threadmccNov 23, 2024

Note: I don't know if I specifically agree with this argument but I think it is very, very interesting

https://mastodon.social/@WAHa_06x36/113529737516750973

Show threadmccNov 23, 2024

A number of people replied to my first post to say "but my objections to Bluesky are governance-related, not technical!". IE, the "what if Bluesky turns evil" argument.

But say someone doesn't like Mastodon. They don't like the UX. Or they don't like the ~vibe~. If you tell them, someday Bluesky will enshittify! Well. That will not be a convincing argument if, from their perspective, Mastodon is *already* shit. Those folks want a site they enjoy *now*. "Will I enjoy it later?" is secondary.

Show threadmcc
Getting various things out of the way to avoid tedious arguments: I am not describing my own opinion in the previous post, and so replying to me to argue against it will not be productive. I post more on Mastodon than on Bluesky. I *do* believe bluesky will turn evil and have made this point myself, on Bluesky. I didn't mention governance in post one because I think in this case governance is downstream from the technical (IE bluesky has baked their dodgy governance directly into the protocol).
Nov 23, 2024 at 4:03amWeb
Show threadDebbie Goldsmith 🏳️‍⚧️♾️🇺🇦Nov 23, 2024

@mcc I agree with you—I have no interest in being a door-knocker Jehovah's Witness for Mastodon. If someone isn't interested, I don't want to harangue them. It behooves Mastodon to make itself more attractive to those people so if they look at it again in a few years they might try it.

The only thing I try convince Bluesky users of is to enable the Fediverse bridge by following @ap.brid.gy, so those here can interact with them. If they don't like it they can always unfollow to turn it back off.

Show threadmccNov 23, 2024
@dgoldsmith I mean I think even evangelizing for mastodon might be a good thing, it's just that you won't be an effective evangelist unless you understand the viewpoint of the person you're trying to convince. Even the Jesuits understand that.
Show threadDebbie Goldsmith 🏳️‍⚧️♾️🇺🇦Nov 23, 2024
@mcc Agreed. I think the Fediverse does need to get better at appealing to people who like the old Twitter/Bluesky vibe.
Show threadnevNov 23, 2024
@mcc @dgoldsmith issuing correction on a previous post of mine, regarding the Society of Jesus. You do not, under any ci
Show threadJPNov 23, 2024
@mcc @dgoldsmith that's kinda where i was going with this: https://mastodon.social/@jplebreton/113483339065841228 anyone who's used open technology long enough needs to learn to take the L and listen when an ordinary person explains why our preferred software doesn't work for them, and make a real attempt to understand their needs.
Show threadCubeThoughtsNov 23, 2024
@mcc I've admittedly not read up as much as I could on the protocols (I keep hearing the AT protocol is wonderful and meaning to dig into it), but I thought it allows for multi-servers at some point, they just haven't implemented it or switched it on. Is that not correct? And/or is the dodgy governance built in in some other way?
Show threadDag Ågren ↙︎↙︎↙︎Nov 23, 2024
@CubeThoughts @mcc I think the summary is: They designed it to support it, but they didn't actually solve the hardest part of the problem, they put in a thing literally called "placeholder" to make it work while they try to figure it out, and that placeholder is still going strong.
Show threadCubeThoughtsNov 23, 2024

@WAHa_06x36 @mcc Ha - "placeholder" does a lot of heavy lifting in my coding too!

I understand, they have a concept of a plan to be multi server, but now with the VC money, that might not be the highest priority. But there is nothing in the design preventing it, so it could be possible, even by forking, to add it in?

Show threadDag Ågren ↙︎↙︎↙︎Nov 23, 2024
@CubeThoughts @mcc I suppose so, if you can actually figure out how to solve the problem. This is a protocol designed by cryptocurrency people, so it prioritises weird things that make everything much harder, I gather.
Show threadDag Ågren ↙︎↙︎↙︎Nov 23, 2024

@mcc You're echoing my thoughts creepily exactly in this thread, honestly. I don't hate Bluesky as it is today, but I am fully expecting to hate it N years from now. I am not expecting to hate the fediverse at that point.

So I'm on Bluesky, but I'm not investing my energy into it, I'm just there to hang out with friends even though we're at a kind of crappy bar.

Show threadDag Ågren ↙︎↙︎↙︎Nov 23, 2024
@mcc Bluesky is just "Let's do Twitter again! I'm sure it won't turn out to be a bad idea THIS time", and I fully understand why that sounds appealing to people, but it doesn't to me.