Remember folks, if you abandon Twitter, Facebook or Google, it's not a boycott, it's a STRIKE.
Because you're the [unpaid] workers that earn them billions of dollars in capital.
When you don't post, they don't get the benefit of your labour. And when you don't use, they lose money.
Social Media STRIKE days should be a thing.
The central person was named Edgar Enyedy, who led a strike when Larry Sanger hinted WP was going to start selling ad space. Enyedy and comrades took the entire Spanish language WP to another server. This was when WP was first going international, so it was vulnerable.
@photopuck That's not quite right. The profits made by large social media are based on viewership, not content creation. So in order to be effective, your "social media STRIKE days" should be defined by not logging in at all. Don't give them your traffic. Simply not posting new content isn't that harmful to them if you're still reading your feed.
@ultimape @photopuck I've been thinking about this same point lately as that social networks are really just owned and designed marketplaces (the malls in your discussion). The notion that one is not "paid" for using them is strangely off-point, as payment is merely compensation for someone's bearing of costs, and people are compensated (though maybe not enough) for the costs that they bear as a result of interacting with the marketplace (by way of being provided dope content).