←back to thread

Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

(petapixel.com)
553 points bookofjoe | 3 comments | 11 Apr 25 14:01 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
megaman821 ◴[11 Apr 25 15:14 UTC] No.43654757[source]▶
As a lurker on both Bluesky and Twitter, I find Bluesky is a much more hostile place. Twitter is much more absurd but there is not as much anger.
replies(25): >>43654879 #>>43654911 #>>43654964 #>>43654978 #>>43654981 #>>43655179 #>>43658062 #>>43658076 #>>43658200 #>>43658690 #>>43659029 #>>43659158 #>>43659250 #>>43659251 #>>43659639 #>>43659684 #>>43659724 #>>43659908 #>>43660101 #>>43660296 #>>43660933 #>>43661119 #>>43665491 #>>43667438 #>>43667522 #
Molitor5901 ◴[11 Apr 25 15:46 UTC] No.43655179[source]▶
I'm pretty left leaning and I don't like Bluesky. For me, it's too hostile and too much of an angry echo chamber. X is scattered wildly but I with muting I have been able to shape to get a more reasonable feed.
replies(8): >>43655251 #>>43657988 #>>43658077 #>>43658450 #>>43659445 #>>43659596 #>>43660179 #>>43663891 #
jghn ◴[11 Apr 25 20:55 UTC] No.43658450[source]▶
I don't understand why people struggle with either site. Follow only people you want to see. Both sites allow you to only see posts from those accounts. Problem solved.
replies(3): >>43658542 #>>43658647 #>>43659568 #
lyjackal ◴[11 Apr 25 22:56 UTC] No.43659568[source]▶
It's more the content creators who bear the brunt of toxic rage. Who you follow doesn't solve that problem
replies(1): >>43659695 #
1. jghn ◴[11 Apr 25 23:11 UTC] No.43659695[source]▶
> the content creators

This is IMO the problem. I don't use these sites to follow "content creators". For the most part I'm following normal people who happen to say things I find interesting.

replies(1): >>43660175 #
2. jacobgkau ◴[12 Apr 25 00:27 UTC] No.43660175[source]▶
I don't think they were saying it's a problem for people following content creators. It's more a problem for content creators, because they usually want the greatest reach possible, so they want to be on platforms that people use, which requires them to put up with the emotional swingings of the platforms' userbases.

If you want to say you don't care about having content creators on your platform, that's at least a coherent take. But you still have to think about the business models of the platforms that keep them around-- short of collecting payments from every ordinary user, there needs to be buy-in from someone wanting reach, whether that's corporate accounts, individual content creators, or someone else. And do you actually know all of those "normal people who happen to say things you find interesting" in real life, or did you find some of them online, i.e. they're basically influencers/content creators with you as an audience member?

replies(1): >>43660525 #
3. jghn ◴[12 Apr 25 01:32 UTC] No.43660525[source]▶
That is indeed what I'm saying. I treat social media more like I treated Usenet back in the day. To me that's a superior model than the influencer model.