The Mastodon social network information thread

[Rainmaker]

Twitter users jump to Mastodon - but what is it?

The little-known social network's user base has swelled after Elon Musk's takeover of Twitter.

www.bbc.co.uk

I can't see it attracting the rich and famous and all their millions of followers like twitter or instagram.

Stephen Fry deleted his Twitter account and joined Mastodon. I don't care if it's popular, I care that it's better.

 

[C Kent]

Stephen Fry deleted his Twitter account and joined Mastodon yesterday.

Only the 5th time he has quit then, wonder if he'll stick to his guns this time

 

[Rainmaker]

Only the 5th time he has quit then, wonder if he'll stick to his guns this time

Who cares? The freedom to choose is what's important.

 

[C Kent]

Who cares? The freedom to choose is what's important.

You seemed to care enough to post he 'quit'?

 

[Rainmaker]

You seemed to care enough to post he 'quit'?

You seem to be looking to argue a point for the sake of it? I was replying to your pondering whether he'll stick to his guns this time - my response being it doesn't matter, it's more important there's a choice of platform available.

 

[Lysander]

Petty arguments are exactly the kind of thing Mastodon aims to stamp out since when people enter a discussion only those two can initially see it.

When you think about it, this makes a big difference because the whole world is not watching to see who will 'do better'. It diffuses things much quicker.

 

[C Kent]

You seem to be looking to argue a point for the sake of it? I was replying to your pondering whether he'll stick to his guns this time - my response being it doesn't matter, it's more important there's a choice of platform available.

I think the point in question is that mastodon isn't a very good alternative, there's always been alternative solutions they just haven't offered what twitter does - hell I'm seeing all sort of screen caps with people being properly trolled by racists and bigots after moving over there, as soon as they realise the level of moderation is non-existent on the platforms being touted by spoilt children they'll all be back, even moreso when the individuals in questions have quit twitter numerous times in the past.

 

[Lysander]

I think the point in question is that mastodon isn't a very good alternative, there's always been alternative solutions they just haven't offered what twitter does

It is an excellent alternative. The problem is that people are so used to Twitter that they will reject how Mastodon operates. They will then just return from whence they came.

It's like people disliking Windows and wanting to move to Linux. Their brains have been "Microsoftened" [haha, what a great term, I just made it up] and even though they like the idea of free software, they can't get their head around actually using it so they go back.

Same with Twitter. People are used to "one login to rule them all" and seeing their tweets broadcast to the masses with each one they make. The majority won't be able to operate any other way and will just go back grudgingly, like the Windows 10 user who hates unscheduled updates and just groans whenever they happen.

It's no coincidence that I'm making a comparison between these thought processes and free software, since Mastodon was made FOR and BY the free software community. Those people who can think outside the box will enjoy it and take the time to learn it. Those who won't, or can't, will go back to Twitter and grit their teeth while doing so.

 

[Salamander]

It doesn't work like that on Mastodon, it's not like Twitter. When you reply to the person concerned, only that person is able to see the reply, it's not broadcast to everyone. This is to discourage other people chipping in with their twopence worth and starting arguments as so often happens on places like Twitter and OCUK.

One could say, "well, that also means that one is potentially missing out on new information or advice", but clearly they deem that to be the minoritative case, and are willing to dam that flow or redirect it towards 1:1 discussions.

Is there anyway to make posts public or is that the point?

 

[Salamander]

Is there anyway to make posts public or is that the point?

By this I mean can you toot a server user base?

 

[Rainmaker]

Fedi Tips and Mastodon Help may help make things clearer.

 

[Demon]

It is an excellent alternative. The problem is that people are so used to Twitter that they will reject how Mastodon operates. They will then just return from whence they came.

It's like people disliking Windows and wanting to move to Linux. Their brains have been "Microsoftened" [haha, what a great term, I just made it up] and even though they like the idea of free software, they can't get their head around actually using it so they go back.

Same with Twitter. People are used to "one login to rule them all" and seeing their tweets broadcast to the masses with each one they make. The majority won't be able to operate any other way and will just go back grudgingly, like the Windows 10 user who hates unscheduled updates and just groans whenever they happen.

It's no coincidence that I'm making a comparison between these thought processes and free software, since Mastodon was made FOR and BY the free software community. Those people who can think outside the box will enjoy it and take the time to learn it. Those who won't, or can't, will go back to Twitter and grit their teeth while doing so.

My brain hurt with Reddit et al for a while, I love the simple threaded nature of this style of forum.. Twitter is bad enough.. Facebook a little easier.. Mastodon is probably blowing peoples minds.

 

[Lysander]

Is there anyway to make posts public or is that the point?

When you post, everyone can see it as long as they're signed in [world icon next to your post]. If you enter into a discussion with someone thereafter, only that person can see it [padlock icon].

 

[Salamander]

When you post, everyone can see it as long as they're signed in [world icon next to your post]. If you enter into a discussion with someone thereafter, only that person can see it [padlock icon].

Thank you

 

[Demon]

Stephen Fry deleted his Twitter account and joined Mastodon. I don't care if it's popular, I care that it's better.

So this will be the, what, 5th time he's "Quit" now.. (previously 2009, 2014, 2015 and 2016)?

I always found Twitter a pretty awful place.. Even if we put the ideological leanings of the moderation direction (or not, depending on your viewpoint of course) to one side, Twitter already allowed people to be extremely hateful to each other, it has/had a problem with all manner of unsavory issues (e.g. https://www.theverge.com/23327809/twitter-onlyfans-child-sexual-content-problem-elon-musk)..

I don't think Mastodon will necessarily fix anything, other than create echo chambers of like minded people, which is good, but twitter was a town square, not a private night club which is something entirely different?

 

[Lysander]

Even if we put the ideological leanings of the moderation direction (or not, depending on your viewpoint of course) to one side, Twitter already allowed people to be extremely hateful to each other,

It did indeed. Because its chief cause was to make money and explain the fights away as human nature rather than try better to control them. It didn't care if the fights got worse or if people's mental health deteriorated, or people killed themselves from being on Twitter because, well, that's humans doing human things, right??

Free software, the cause behind it, has always been "do one thing and do it well" and, in this case, Mastodon was always about creating a safe, cohesive community.

 

[Lysander]

9 times out of 10 when I see people banging on about toxicity they aren't talking about real toxicity, which there isn't a shortage of on the internet either. More often it is people who can't deal with their reality being questioned.

How can you quantify that statement? It's impossible without some kind of evidence [which will be subjective anyway]. It's an extremely damaging thing to say. There are people who are reading this, who will take that in and think, "oh, so I am not on the end of toxic behaviour, maybe it's my fault?" and will begin questioning themselves. That's an awful train of thought to have to deal with.

"Some of", fine, OK, understandable. But 90%? I would urge you to reconsider that figure. I have been on the receiving end of toxic behaviour, and one of the worst things you can do is start believing [as these people make you do] that it's actually your problem.

I am sorry, I am going slightly off topic, but I couldn't let that comment go. I think it's a very irresponsible thing to write on a public forum and it's important that it's addressed.

 

[C Kent]

How can you quantify that statement? It's impossible without some kind of evidence [which will be subjective anyway]. It's an extremely damaging thing to say. There are people who are reading this, who will take that in and think, "oh, so I am not on the end of toxic behaviour, maybe it's my fault?" and will begin questioning themselves. That's an awful train of thought to have to deal with.

"Some of", fine, OK, understandable. But 90%? I would urge you to reconsider that figure. I have been on the receiving end of toxic behaviour, and one of the worst things you can do is start believing [as these people make you do] that it's actually your problem.

I am sorry, I am going slightly off topic, but I couldn't let that comment go. I think it's a very irresponsible thing to write on a public forum and it's important that it's addressed.

Would you say that his sttatement is.. toxic?

 

[Rroff]

How can you quantify that statement? It's impossible without some kind of evidence [which will be subjective anyway]. It's an extremely damaging thing to say. There are people who are reading this, who will take that in and think, "oh, so I am not on the end of toxic behaviour, maybe it's my fault?" and will begin questioning themselves. That's an awful train of thought to have to deal with.

"Some of", fine, OK, understandable. But 90%? I would urge you to reconsider that figure. I have been on the receiving end of toxic behaviour, and one of the worst things you can do is start believing [as these people make you do] that it's actually your problem.

I am sorry, I am going slightly off topic, but I couldn't let that comment go. I think it's a very irresponsible thing to write on a public forum and it's important that it's addressed.

I see it a lot on Twitter for instance where you can compare the complaints about toxic behaviour to the actual threads of conversation and interactions in the past which they are alluding to as toxic behaviours. (A typical one being software developers).

I will absolutely stand by that figure of about 90% - there are people who are subject to abuse and comments like hope they die of cancer and so on but far far more often it is thin skinned or people existing in a bubble who can not distinguish, or don't want to distinguish, between criticism/opinions and people actually being hateful.

I think it is equally very harmful to allow differences of opinion and so on to be silenced by branding them as toxicity.

EDIT: One thing I will say there is that might be more relevant to the environments I experience than necessarily a representation of the whole - but, unfortunately, I stand by what I say that far far more often than not people are using "toxicity" as a weapon rather than actually being on the receiving end of real toxicity.

 

[Lysander]

I see it a lot on Twitter for instance where you can compare the complaints about toxic behaviour to the actual threads of conversation and interactions in the past which they are alluding to as toxic behaviours. (A typical one being software developers).

I will absolutely stand by that figure of about 90% - there are people who are subject to abuse and comments like hope they die of cancer and so on but far far more often it is thin skinned or people existing in a bubble who can not distinguish, or don't want to distinguish, between criticism/opinions and people actually being hateful.

I think it is equally very harmful to allow differences of opinion and so on to be silenced by branding them as toxicity.

EDIT: One thing I will say there is that might be more relevant to the environments I experience than necessarily a representation of the whole - but, unfortunately, I stand by what I say that far far more often than not people are using "toxicity" as a weapon rather than actually being on the receiving end of real toxicity.

I am not going to derail the thread and I imagined you would stand by the figure, which is disappointing, since, as is often the way on Twitter, it is normally the vocal minority who make it seem that a certain situation is the majoritative case. As I also said, it is impossible to quantify the figure. Difference of opinion should not be branded as toxicity, I agree, but I think the statement is a damaging one since no-one should question themselves when on the receiving end of real toxic behaviour.

It's the people who have misused the term who have invalidated its genuine meaning, and that shouldn't be allowed to happen by letting their cases disproportionately overshadow others.