Is #mastodon becoming an echo chamber? This post from @carnage4life has me questioning our community. The Mastodon team is finally getting some traction, the product improvements are increasing, The #UX is improving, yet people posting on multiple platforms are making comments like this. It's confusing.
I *know* people here don't want this to be a classic social media-clone but we'd *like* journalists to be here right? They aren't coming with examples like this!
As this conversation is spiraling a bit I want to make a few things clear:
1. I'd like Mastodon to be MORE inclusive and bring in more voices
2. Some people don't seem to want that
3. This is core problem to solve: How do we let more in, but not "pollute" your feed?
4. The solution is NOT "gatekeeping", revelling in the fact that AI journalists aren't welcome
5. This is the same reason we lost "Black Twitter" when it came over in 2022
Yes, a lot of you don't want AI posts in your feed (or pick any other topic) but the solution isn't to keep "AI People" from joining Mastodon, any more than it is keeping marginalized communities off of Mastodon.
@Gargron That is a personal choice and one which I totally respect. But I do think Mastodon should be big enough, and open enough, to allow an "AI community" to form, even thrive.
Too many people in my replies don't seem to agree with that.
@cratermoon @scottjenson @Gargron This is a very rich ethics question hidden in a specific example.
Would you permit or allow any community with which you disagree to participate on a platform, even if you’re not forced to participate?
A shortlist of thought experiments, to broaden the perspective, some of which are already here, some not…
- The oil & gas community
- Forestry workers (logging)
- The cryptocurrency community
- Workers at a chick rendering plant
- The finance industry
- Adult content creators
- Religious communities
Is there a litmus test for topics that you can or can’t discuss on the fediverse? Specific servers sure, but the whole fediverse?
Does that align with the values put forth by mastodon or the fediverse in general?
I don’t have the answers.
@trisweb @cratermoon @scottjenson @Gargron by definition, no. Literally anyone can spin up a server and talk about anything/try to get more folk to listen…
But other folk have to want to listen to whatever they are saying. Servers and individuals can just decide not to. No one is guaranteed an audience, just the ability to speak.
That is the exact opposite of what I said. I'm saying the fediverse gives you the tools to follow/block/filter/ to your hearts content to create the space you want.
What is corrosive is people ACTIVELY going after people they don't agree with. Just look at the replies to my post to get small sample.
My point was, I thought, very simple, and very reasonable: we should be more welcoming of more opinions. If you don't like them, then don't follow them. That should be the fedi-way. To be clear, I'm NOT endorsing AI, it just used it as an example.
Instead I'm living the very point I was trying to make. I've been told to leave, called a racist, and had ad hominem attacks leveled at me.
Now to be fair, my original post was poorly worded. I've owned that
https://social.coop/@scottjenson/116358195717244835
@pmdj @scottjenson Those problems would be largely fixed by reply controls and a working* block function, but for some reason Mastodon team can't give us those.
(*) By "working", I mean a block function that detaches all past replies by the account you're blocking from your posts, so that you're not serving as a billboard for their opinions every time someone expands your toot.
@lispi314 @pmdj @scottjenson If you have a client that's stitching them together, that's your business.
But my instance should not be using the "fetch context of this post by me" action to advertise hostile replies by someone I've explicitly blocked to others who are reading what I've written.
@pmdj @dalias
First, I'm using AI as an example, I'm not endorsing AI at all.
Second, and only as an example, there are open source people working on ethically trained local small language models. Again, I'm NOT endorsing them, but I can pretty confidently say that they would NOT be welcome here.
The same applies to journalism, there are VERY strong emotions here, basically telling them to fuck off (their words, not mine)
My point is that there is a pattern here: there are topics this community actively hates and "patrols" against. If that's what the community wants, cool, I'm not here to dictate anything. My point is that it might be nice to have a slightly more open way of sharing ideas: Follow, block, filter. You have the tools to make the feed you want (there are clearly more tools that would be helpful)
I'm just saying that focusing on your feed seems more healthy that attacking people whose opinions you don't like. Here, let me me give you an example of what I got 10 min ago
@pmdj @dalias Yeah, social media always attracts jerks. Just saying I'm not having a great day right now...
That reply is likely a distraction. I'm just saying that I'd like the fediverse to have more discussion more ideas more exploration and I feel that many of the people we'd like to attract don't feel safe doing that.
I'm not dictating anything, I'm just trying to create an environment that attracts more people that think outside our bubble.
@scottjenson @pmdj @[email protected]
I'm with you Scott.
The Luddites are rude and hypocrites.
On one hand they talk about community.
On the other they are literally aggressively hostile pushing their Kool kids purity cults...
Gatekeeping Muppets.
...even as they feed techbro training datasets.
You sound more like you're just annoyed people don't share your opinions and are vocal about it. You're an example of exactly what you're raging against..
@scottjenson I'm with @pmdj on his point that, there's no good reason to consider that the opinion of all or even the majority of people here. The way this works, wouldn't even make that any individual is connected to every other individual, same applies to instances. This by itself would make it likely not representative, but people might even be blocking topics and words and accounts about AI and have no idea of what's happening on AI threads.
@scottjenson we also know that nay sayers and assholes are usually more vocal than, people who like, or aren't concerned about something, and who are polite and respectful.
This doesn't mean that this noisy people aren't problematic, or act problematic about some particular topic, just that they need to be put into perspective, reported and blocked.
@dalias I strongly disagree that polite and disrespectful is not something to aspire. Being human towards others is something we should aspire. I police whatever I want to police on my feed, I recommend others to do the same.
It says exactly what I said, naysayers and assholes are always the most vocal. This is what I said, and it's precisely the full extent of what I said, anything more is not my opinion, it's not mine, and you're not entitled to say which is my opinion.
@dalias You're free to not be polite and respectful towards others, but personally I've found that being polite and respectful is better for me, and since I also can choose to behave how I want and give my opinion, that's what'll do.
@dalias to be polite and respectful, is not to be subservient. You can be those two things and stand your ground, be direct and say your thoughts, even veemently. We just don't need to dehumanize, to insult, dogpile, be obnoxious, or to behave even worse.
I'm not perfect, and I'm sure I did wrong to some, but I do aspire to strive for good and positive human interactions.
@jonikorpi haha yeah...
I'll completely own the fact that I didn't set up my argument correctly but the desire of so many to intentionally misread what I said and actively shut down any attempt at a conversation is frustrating. I mean I was used to this on Twitter, it's just as bad here.
I was told it should have been a blog post which was good advice.
> My point is that there is a pattern here: there are topics this community actively hates
My problem here: I cannot just stop advocating against the current strain of AI only because an overwhelming majority here also dislikes it.
I suppose others are in the same position and --- bam! --- you suddenly got a community that dislikes AI.
Looking for root causes, I'd guess that is, because such a lot of creatives (in a wide sense) are here.
Digging s mainstreaming hole...
@scottjenson @pmdj @dalias two thoughts on the topic. AI is forced upon people on the Internet everywhere. Thus, it is disliked and hated, as it is no longer a choice. This triggers an emotional response and gets in the way discussing the technology in a more rational way. This is especially the way when using AI as a term without qualifiers, as it is understood as Tech Bro AI alias OpenAI, Microslop and even Anthropic.
Beside that 1/3
@scottjenson @pmdj @dalias you can have a discussion (as in not screaming at each other) on technical topics around AI, but better do not use AI as term, as it is unspecific and encompasses neural networks, language models and spreadsheets all alike.
As a large account with many followers, it could, however, happen that you attract with any comment a large crowd and within, those who oppose your opinion, will be the loudest. Here muting people could help.
That said, having some general 2/3
Scott Jenson
Eugen Rochko
cratermoon
trisweb
CM Harrington
Cassandrich
Phil Dennis-Jordan
LisPi
Charlie O’Hara
Wulfy—Speaker to the machines
sotolf
Diogo Constantino
Samwise -> Hard Difficulty
Joni Korpi
Glitzersachen
hamish campbell
django
Sobri | Zoe (she/her)
Jupiter Rowland
Reiner Jung 🇬🇱 🇺🇦 🇪🇺