I think a major source of bad Mastodon takes is that people are used to a totalizing, Facebookian idea of why social networks have value; Facebook (purportedly) has value because every single person you know is on it. But from a lot of perspectives, this is a misfeature. People fail to grasp how Mastodon can have value when it's about participative communities and not about mapping your entire social life onto a digital space.
@brunodias :clap::clap::clap:
@brunodias I would not be comparing this to fb. I'm not even trying to get fb users here. This is a twitter replacement, imo. Totally different use case for me.
@greermahoney No I know, but a lot of people writing bad takes are applying this implicitly Facebook-based valuation to Mastodon
@brunodias you're absolutely correct. This is more community and less "quantifying"
@brunodias It feels a bit like what Imzy was/is trying to do, the way it allows you to pick a per-community persona. You don't have to be the same person everywhere on the site, but you do have to be consistent about who you are in this one place. I can see people using instances in kind of the same way.
@brunodias then again, I'm into social media marketing. So this has to work someway, somehow.
@brunodias maybe a good point of comparison is LiveJournal, which had the opposite problem--developed a reputation for being a toxic bog of oversharing closed communities all isolated from one another. The idea of a structural weakness exposing messages intended only for trusted users in such an intimate environment is really scary
@brunodias I *don't* use facebook because everyone I know is on there. If me mum saw the kinda shitposting I did here I would be in srs trouble :P