ar.al (@aral@mastodon.ar.al)
mastodon.ar.al
Attached: 2 images The difference between a closed, algorithmically-curated silo like Twitter and the fediverse. Same post. Twitter: ~43K “followers”, 8 boosts, 58 likes Fediverse: ~8.43K followers, 57 boosts, 106 likes Your thousands of “followers” on Twitter mean nothing because the algorithm (i.e., Twitter, Inc.) decides who gets to hear you. #fediverse

Click the link, it has 2 pictures rather than lemmy’s 1 pic preview

  • bashrc@lemmy.ml
    4·
    3 years ago

    This is true, but it’s not the quantity of engagement that matters, it’s the quality. Also the fediverse isn’t necessarily intrinsically better than a hellish corporate site, but it’s operated more democratically which tends (not always) to lead to better quality overall.

  • Ninmi@sopuli.xyz
    2·
    3 years ago

    Mastodon is actually built to be social while Twitter just hones its algorithms. There’s so much Twitter could straight up copy from Mastodon and it would make it so much better. Eugen and the community have gotten a lot of things right.

  • Liwott@lemmy.ml
    0·
    3 years ago

    Isn’t scale effect playing at least as much as engagement? In the sense that the message gets more easily drawn in a Twitter feed than in a Mastodon one.