Our mission at Twitter 2.0 is to promote and protect the public conversation. We believe Twitter users have the right to express their opinions and ideas without fear of censorship.
“Freedom of Speech, not Freedom of Reach - our enforcement philosophy which means, where appropriate, restricting the reach of Tweets that violate our policies by making the content less discoverable.”
Surprise! Our great ‘X’ CEO has brought back one more bad thing that we hated about twitter 1.0: Shadowbanning. And they’ve given it a new name: “Freedom of Speech, Not Reach”.
Perhaps the new approach by X is an improvement? At least they would “politely” tell you when you’re being shadow banned.
I think freedom of speech implies that people have the autonomy to decide what they want to see, rather than being manipulated by algorithm codes. Now it feels like they’re saying, “you can still have your microphone… We’re just gonna cut the power to it if you say something we don’t like”.
Everyone complaining or saying leave but nobody talking about alternatives that solve some of the problems. Mastodon exists. Nostr exists. BlueSky kind of exists.
The problem with the alternatives is there’s no draw to any of these sites. Like people aren’t going to Mastodon because it has some amazing features that everyone wishes Twitter had, they’re going because they don’t like Musk.
There’s so much on Twitter that these other sites don’t have that it’s hard to justify leaving. There are so many politicians, reporters, athletes and teams, bands, artists, etc all on Twitter. I follow hockey pretty closely and every major trade that happened last season was first reported on Twitter. Will I get that breaking news on Mastodon? No, so what is the draw to Mastodon? What does the average user get out of moving over?
What do content creators get out of moving? An artist can have years of their work on their account as a portfolio to draw new fans and get work, but if they move none of those posts show up on Mastodon. Now they have to post their entire portfolio again, and that doesn’t even guarantee that their audience will follow them. Now they’re on a much smaller website with a much smaller audience and they’re probably not going to get the same exposure or opportunities that they had when on Twitter.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !technology@lemmy.world
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Everyone complaining or saying leave but nobody talking about alternatives that solve some of the problems. Mastodon exists. Nostr exists. BlueSky kind of exists.
The problem with the alternatives is there’s no draw to any of these sites. Like people aren’t going to Mastodon because it has some amazing features that everyone wishes Twitter had, they’re going because they don’t like Musk.
There’s so much on Twitter that these other sites don’t have that it’s hard to justify leaving. There are so many politicians, reporters, athletes and teams, bands, artists, etc all on Twitter. I follow hockey pretty closely and every major trade that happened last season was first reported on Twitter. Will I get that breaking news on Mastodon? No, so what is the draw to Mastodon? What does the average user get out of moving over?
What do content creators get out of moving? An artist can have years of their work on their account as a portfolio to draw new fans and get work, but if they move none of those posts show up on Mastodon. Now they have to post their entire portfolio again, and that doesn’t even guarantee that their audience will follow them. Now they’re on a much smaller website with a much smaller audience and they’re probably not going to get the same exposure or opportunities that they had when on Twitter.