I want to recognize people. I want to care about them and see what they have to say. This has meaning in and of itself.
Smaller forums have self-selected audiences who care about specific things and are more caring about those things as you have mentioned.
More importantly I don’t want to have to shovel through 500 mostly identical comments to try to find something actually meaningful or unique. Especially when those comments are negative, hurtful, angering, or simply stupid. User moderation, for the most part, simply doesn’t work.
Tildes reminds me of all the time I spent on forums from the mid 90s into the 00s. I like that I recognize people. I like that it's text only and that there's a variety of topics to discuss; it's not just a bunch of hot takes, one liners and non-sequiters. There's no memes, little low effort posts, etc.
First place I refresh in the morning and last one at night.
Either run by donations or supported by the owner/admin.
Feels more "privacy friendly"
Easy
Reddit is too corporate and focused on monetization and growth without regard to product quality. They have some practices that feel anti-user, especially around mobile. The moderation policies seem historically inconsistent at best.
The fediverse/mastadon is too small, too difficult, and the decentralization solves problems I don't care about enough to accept those tradeoffs. It's pretty hard to find compelling content on some of those platforms, and the drama can be high.
I also think that platforms that don't operate on invite systems are likely too vulnerable to spam and bots. It doesn't completely solve the problem but it does introduce a barrier and an audit trail.
With my social media / news platforms I want transparency, privacy, and generally benevolent centralized ownership. Socially responsible business structures are a huge plus as well if they can be (such as a PBC, Nonprofit, etc..).
@Akir's opening comment is a big part of if it for me:
I want to recognize people. I want to care about them and see what they have to say. This has meaning in and of itself.
It's also that people simply treat each other better here. It's usually trusted that we're arguing in good faith, and trolling mostly doesn't happen. When people disagree, it's likely to be civil and respectful.
I do think this is changing somewhat, which bothers me. But for now I think the above statements are still generally true.
They're different types of social media. Lemmy, Mastodon, and Piefed are all microblogging sites like Twitter was - they're designed around fast-moving content where you follow individuals based on what they post. Tildes and Lobsters are link-aggregator type sites where you follow a general topic and discuss posts that are usually not created by whoever shared them. The way the content is created and organized discourages scrolling and encourages conversation, especially design decisions like putting the comment box at the bottom here on Tildes.
Why we like sites like Tildes and Lobsters could be an interesting discussion but shitting on the Fediverse is a needless sidetrack. The Fediverse is what you make it. If you get cringe content that's because that's the kind of people you followed. There is no algorithm pushing it in your face.
Or more accurately the Fediverse is what people, left to their own devices, make it.
And that's the problem. In a vacuum, the majority of people will tend towards being reasonably rational and kind. But it only takes a handful of people, in a given space, to change the vibe. Once people start getting triggered, reasonable and kind are the first things to go. It's just biology.
In addition to that, even a fairly low percentage of negativity and triggers is enough to put off most of the first timers you actually want to keep. So it becomes self selecting, over time you end up with a higher and higher percentage of people who are just there for the drama. Trolls and troll feeders essentially.
So any space that doesn't actively work to discourage people's worst instincts eventually succumbs to them. Not because people generally suck, but because people have built in systems that make them suck temporarily when they're in triggering environments.
The fediverse has the reputation it does for a reason and I think anyone who's interested in supporting and improving it should be taking it seriously, because what you're seeing is a selective process pushing away a lot of the people you probably want to stick around.
Which is why self moderation and "free speech" ethos have never really worked on the internet.
Does anyone have a recommendation for other sites like tildes? I’ve noticed a significant drop off since the “sunsetting” conversation, so I’d like to see what other smaller sites exist. (Lobsters seems to be tech-focused, so of less interest to me personally.)
One thing I like that I didn't see anyone else mention is that I feel like there are a lot of very knowledgeable and experienced people here. Especially considered the relatively small size of the community. So there's often interesting and nuanced takes on many topics.
I do find Tildes interesting, perhaps because it's a small community where there's high trust in people putting in effort and bringing their genuine self to discussions.
I actually don't find Lobsters that interesting, and read hacker news instead despite hating it and getting psychic damage from reading it every day. For as much as I find the people atrocious and the discussions lacking, the reason I read it instead of Lobsters is because of the sheer number of comments. I do, for this one instance, actually want to read what hundreds of selfish and deluded assholes have to say about vaguely tech related (and other) articles. Lobsters does seem to have much higher quality discussions about some of the same topics, but then I'm just reading like 20 posts about something I could have got much of the meat from the article about, instead of 300 weirdos.
Akir | 6 hours ago
I want to recognize people. I want to care about them and see what they have to say. This has meaning in and of itself.
Smaller forums have self-selected audiences who care about specific things and are more caring about those things as you have mentioned.
More importantly I don’t want to have to shovel through 500 mostly identical comments to try to find something actually meaningful or unique. Especially when those comments are negative, hurtful, angering, or simply stupid. User moderation, for the most part, simply doesn’t work.
DiggWasCool | 4 hours ago
This is what I dislike about reddit in general. There are too may threads that blow up quickly and there is really no conversation.
However, several niche sub reddits are great where you can still have a conversation with other people
Zorind | 4 hours ago
A lot of the “big” subreddits now too are just a bunch of reaction gifs as comments, which is even worse than bad discussion.
[OP] ocean-hai | 6 hours ago
Very much agree with this sentiment. Reddit is certainly such and the fediverse can also be quite toxic.
BeardyHat | 6 hours ago
All that.
Tildes reminds me of all the time I spent on forums from the mid 90s into the 00s. I like that I recognize people. I like that it's text only and that there's a variety of topics to discuss; it's not just a bunch of hot takes, one liners and non-sequiters. There's no memes, little low effort posts, etc.
First place I refresh in the morning and last one at night.
TurtleCracker | 6 hours ago
Reddit is too corporate and focused on monetization and growth without regard to product quality. They have some practices that feel anti-user, especially around mobile. The moderation policies seem historically inconsistent at best.
The fediverse/mastadon is too small, too difficult, and the decentralization solves problems I don't care about enough to accept those tradeoffs. It's pretty hard to find compelling content on some of those platforms, and the drama can be high.
I also think that platforms that don't operate on invite systems are likely too vulnerable to spam and bots. It doesn't completely solve the problem but it does introduce a barrier and an audit trail.
With my social media / news platforms I want transparency, privacy, and generally benevolent centralized ownership. Socially responsible business structures are a huge plus as well if they can be (such as a PBC, Nonprofit, etc..).
all_summer_beauty | 6 hours ago
@Akir's opening comment is a big part of if it for me:
It's also that people simply treat each other better here. It's usually trusted that we're arguing in good faith, and trolling mostly doesn't happen. When people disagree, it's likely to be civil and respectful.
I do think this is changing somewhat, which bothers me. But for now I think the above statements are still generally true.
Banazir | 6 hours ago
They're different types of social media. Lemmy, Mastodon, and Piefed are all microblogging sites like Twitter was - they're designed around fast-moving content where you follow individuals based on what they post. Tildes and Lobsters are link-aggregator type sites where you follow a general topic and discuss posts that are usually not created by whoever shared them. The way the content is created and organized discourages scrolling and encourages conversation, especially design decisions like putting the comment box at the bottom here on Tildes.
donio | 5 hours ago
Why we like sites like Tildes and Lobsters could be an interesting discussion but shitting on the Fediverse is a needless sidetrack. The Fediverse is what you make it. If you get cringe content that's because that's the kind of people you followed. There is no algorithm pushing it in your face.
post_below | 3 hours ago
Or more accurately the Fediverse is what people, left to their own devices, make it.
And that's the problem. In a vacuum, the majority of people will tend towards being reasonably rational and kind. But it only takes a handful of people, in a given space, to change the vibe. Once people start getting triggered, reasonable and kind are the first things to go. It's just biology.
In addition to that, even a fairly low percentage of negativity and triggers is enough to put off most of the first timers you actually want to keep. So it becomes self selecting, over time you end up with a higher and higher percentage of people who are just there for the drama. Trolls and troll feeders essentially.
So any space that doesn't actively work to discourage people's worst instincts eventually succumbs to them. Not because people generally suck, but because people have built in systems that make them suck temporarily when they're in triggering environments.
The fediverse has the reputation it does for a reason and I think anyone who's interested in supporting and improving it should be taking it seriously, because what you're seeing is a selective process pushing away a lot of the people you probably want to stick around.
Which is why self moderation and "free speech" ethos have never really worked on the internet.
DiggWasCool | 4 hours ago
I haven't used any of those, or even really never heard of any of those besides mastodon until just now.
I do still use reddit but I am only subscribed to several very small and niche subs and a few local subs.
I like Tildes mainly because it feels like a small community, it reminds me a lot of reddit circa 2008 or Digg circa 2006.
paris | 3 hours ago
Does anyone have a recommendation for other sites like tildes? I’ve noticed a significant drop off since the “sunsetting” conversation, so I’d like to see what other smaller sites exist. (Lobsters seems to be tech-focused, so of less interest to me personally.)
PunchTunnel | 24 minutes ago
I also spend time on Discuit, which might scratch your itch. It's similarly small, general topics, and community-centered.
Bwerf | 42 minutes ago
One thing I like that I didn't see anyone else mention is that I feel like there are a lot of very knowledgeable and experienced people here. Especially considered the relatively small size of the community. So there's often interesting and nuanced takes on many topics.
an_angry_tiger | 32 minutes ago
I do find Tildes interesting, perhaps because it's a small community where there's high trust in people putting in effort and bringing their genuine self to discussions.
I actually don't find Lobsters that interesting, and read hacker news instead despite hating it and getting psychic damage from reading it every day. For as much as I find the people atrocious and the discussions lacking, the reason I read it instead of Lobsters is because of the sheer number of comments. I do, for this one instance, actually want to read what hundreds of selfish and deluded assholes have to say about vaguely tech related (and other) articles. Lobsters does seem to have much higher quality discussions about some of the same topics, but then I'm just reading like 20 posts about something I could have got much of the meat from the article about, instead of 300 weirdos.