I’m not very active on Mastodon, but saw this post - browsing the bluesky hashtag for a bit afterwards did not really give me much info. I can definitely imagine enshittification happening there, but what is causing the current drama in particular?
None of these comments are correct. This is referring to an economist and semafor article. In the article, a democratic strategist said that his “moderate” candidate was bullied off bluesky.
(No doubt because he is super zionist and isn’t doing anything to protect people from trump).
Then some people quoted the article saying bluesky is dying and it got out of hand everyone started repeating it without knowing the context.
All that happened is some center right pro elite politician got criticised so much they left the platform. And now the mainstream media is trying to paint bluesky as “not inclusive” or “too radical”.
https://bsky.app/profile/vulgareconomics.bsky.social/post/3lq3bdtdgks2r
some center right pro elite politician got criticised so much they left the platform.
Sounds like the exact right amount of inclusion and radicalism to me.
The only thing I’ve personally noticed is we seem to have received another burp of magas recently.
It takes very little effort to keep that shit out of your feed on Bluesky if you don’t want to see it, so I usually only see the magas when they crop up in comments on George Takei posts and similar.
I’m a big proponent of the “block early and block often” mindset in the fediverse and bluesky, so I do tend to notice how much time I spend blocking magas, and I hadn’t needed to do so for weeks until recently. I figured it was from 4chan imploding.
Wait, why does George takei attract magas?
Or is he just a well known & largely followed person on bluesky?Wait, why does George takei attract magas?
Its because he’s their most prominent gay, non-white opponent. They don’t like it when he reminds them he actually experienced American concentration camps before they were moved to El Salvador.
Some people are expecting the imminent apocalypse because there’s verification now. I don’t think it’s a bad idea to verify that somebody is who they’re claiming to be but what do I know.
oof. is that what this is about? that’s a big thing for some people - especially now.
i know what you’re saying with your last sentence, but it also allows people to be tracked down and held accountable for criticizing trumps favourite things.
Not like you have to be verified.
i just still don’t get it. like, twitter was a 2012 thing, back when text messages were a thing with limitations. now, the only limitation you have is texting between an apple and an android. why the fuck is twitter even still a thing - if not for the fact that most people can’t take a thought longer than 140 fucking characters?
Wha? Because this is not “texting”? I don’t know what you’re asking.
twitter was founded as an app that allowed you to basically broadcast a text message. back then, sms messaging only allowed for 140 characters max per message. that’s why twitter became so big - it was basically a great way to shout headlines out to everyone who wanted to hear you. this was back in the days where the internet was still becoming a viable commercial thing and people were still mostly using tvs/cds/landlines.
now, texting is pretty much indistinguishable from emailing, and everybody’s phones are fully on the web. the only thing imo that’s still keeping tweets around is that people don’t want to consider options that provide for a reason they might have to read more.
Whether it’s happening now or later, it’s a corporate media site, so it’s inevitably going to become enshittified and populated with AI and bots.
Way to not answer the question…
