Its interesting to read 3 or 4 topics on the same thing (sometimes it’s even the same person posting to multiple instances) but getting wildly different “public opinion” depending on where it was posted and who ended up as the top comment (which tends to influence the rest of the comments).
Yeah, i have yet to see any actually good arguments for all this unification and merging talk. Do people just have some OCD stuff going or are there any real problems with the way it is right now?
Its almost zero effort to just follow multiple communities for the same stuff and there are clients that automatically hide crossposts if that annoys people.
Yeah, i have yet to see any actually good arguments for all this unification and merging talk. Do people just have some OCD stuff going or are there any real problems with the way it is right now?
I don’t want the same post to show up 5 times in a row. And even when it’s not in a row I’m tired of seeing the same post, but on 50 different places over the course of a week. That example happens all the damn time with political posts. I don’t want to filter them all out, but seeing the same thing over and over and over again is extremely annoying.
Myopia is generally curable. There are a preponderance of problems associated with multiple competing communities, especially in the early days of a social network. Your blindness to that doesn’t make them cease to be. Maybe take the blinders off.
The fundamental problem is that social graphs like the ones created from something like a sub-lemmy are fundamentally dependent on the level of activity. You have to get to some critical threshold before the process becomes self-sustaining. Specifically, by diffusing the activity across many sub-lemmy’s you never get to enough activity to create a self sustaining community. This isn’t unique to social graphs but should be obvious to any one capable of figuring out the right side of a key-board to pound.
More activity creates more insentive to create more activity. There are activation thresholds within the network at which a level of activity becomes self sustaining. We see the fall out of this constantly from people who carry a torch for a small sub for months, maybe years, then finally give up. Recently there was a fellow who had been doing so for some Portuguese subs. Seems like they had been a mod on Reddit and were trying to rebuild the community here, but it all fell apart.
The diffusion of subs is the fundamental issue holding back lemmy, and its made worse with federation.
I prefer the separation.
Its interesting to read 3 or 4 topics on the same thing (sometimes it’s even the same person posting to multiple instances) but getting wildly different “public opinion” depending on where it was posted and who ended up as the top comment (which tends to influence the rest of the comments).
Yeah, i have yet to see any actually good arguments for all this unification and merging talk. Do people just have some OCD stuff going or are there any real problems with the way it is right now?
Its almost zero effort to just follow multiple communities for the same stuff and there are clients that automatically hide crossposts if that annoys people.
I don’t want the same post to show up 5 times in a row. And even when it’s not in a row I’m tired of seeing the same post, but on 50 different places over the course of a week. That example happens all the damn time with political posts. I don’t want to filter them all out, but seeing the same thing over and over and over again is extremely annoying.
Myopia is generally curable. There are a preponderance of problems associated with multiple competing communities, especially in the early days of a social network. Your blindness to that doesn’t make them cease to be. Maybe take the blinders off.
Maybe list some arguments then? Or you just shit posting here?
You are obviously the kind of person who expects other to do their work for them, and to then simply pass judgement.
You don’t strike me as the kind of person worth wasting the time to explain things on, but to get you started, here is a lecture on basic network theory: https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/14-15-networks-spring-2022/mit14_15s22_lec2.pdf
Google some of the concepts within.
The fundamental problem is that social graphs like the ones created from something like a sub-lemmy are fundamentally dependent on the level of activity. You have to get to some critical threshold before the process becomes self-sustaining. Specifically, by diffusing the activity across many sub-lemmy’s you never get to enough activity to create a self sustaining community. This isn’t unique to social graphs but should be obvious to any one capable of figuring out the right side of a key-board to pound.
More activity creates more insentive to create more activity. There are activation thresholds within the network at which a level of activity becomes self sustaining. We see the fall out of this constantly from people who carry a torch for a small sub for months, maybe years, then finally give up. Recently there was a fellow who had been doing so for some Portuguese subs. Seems like they had been a mod on Reddit and were trying to rebuild the community here, but it all fell apart.
The diffusion of subs is the fundamental issue holding back lemmy, and its made worse with federation.
Toxic