In case you’re wondering about the difference in engagement between an algorithmically-curated silo like Twitter and a chronological, open system like the fediverse: I ran the same poll on both.

# followers: 44,288
# votes: 425
% 0.96%

# followers: 7,435
# votes: 211
% 2.84%

In other words, if my Twitter account had the same engagement as this one, ~1,257 people would have voted.

Also, on Twitter, I’ve no idea whether/if people see my tweets and why/why not. And if Twitter wants to, they can gaslight me by not showing my tweets or algorithmically reducing their reach. It’s a black box. And it’s theirs. So, yeah, your follower count doesn’t mean a thing.


@aral I would also argue that the fediverse has higher quality content from it's users.
Yes you have to take time to sort through and find the right people to follow. But on Twitter you're also sorting through more memes, shitposts, and spam.

Your statistics are appreciated!

· · Web · 0 · 0 · 2
Sign in to participate in the conversation

The original server operated by the Mastodon gGmbH non-profit