@bksmgglr

good question. I love it because I have been on the Internet for 20 years and have some experience with such things. but I am a reporter by trade and generally reporters are completely unable to understand anything new. so, they initially dismiss it as horrible and only look for reasons not to use it.

@Migukin Interesting statement, why do you think that is? Why, in your eyes, do people in your trade mostly behave that way? I mean I would think it should be the exact opposite, especially in that kind of trade.

@bksmgglr @Migukin I have been a big fan of Google+ and have built amazing community and connection there. It's been a wonderful place to learn. And that platform was completely trashed by the tech press. It was almost as though they really *wanted* it to fail. Still scratching my head over that one.

This week/month is one of those critical moments for Mastodon in terms of managing expectations, I think.

@gideonro @Migukin Interesting, I mean, I'll be honest, I actually have quite a bad picture of Google+. Now I am wondering if that's in any way justified...

@bksmgglr @gideonro I think G+ is great, the real names issue killed it and...it was designed by people who did not understand human interactions as well as Facebook. But the premise was strong and it's unfortunate that it did not become a success.

@bksmgglr @Migukin It actually has been a wonderful place in the past. Now, less so. I've had so many wonderful conversations there and have learned a lot.

So, yes, I think that lots of people see it as this total failure, but largely because the press went out of its way to compare it to Facebook, which wasn't what it was.

@gideonro @bksmgglr on, that, we disagree. it was inevitable that G+ would be compared to Facebook, given that it was Googles attempt to dethrown Facebook. Shrug.

@Migukin @bksmgglr It was that. But the original designers had something quite different in mind. I've studied this quite closely.

The new focus on interest sharing gets to the heart of that original design, but the new design has been done in a very ham-fisted way.

@gideonro @bksmgglr but that is lost in the general shuffle. People don't have time to do research or have a nuanced opinion.

@bksmgglr because reporters are often the first to experience things for the general public and they do one thing and one right well: observe and write. They look for what's wrong with things so they can get an angle from which to present information.

Tech people get mad, and the circle of life is complete.

@cdevroe @Migukin IF the platform provides something people value highly, they will learn and adapt, if not, the platform better have a very low barrier of entry. #UX #mastodon
#Snapchat shined with short-lived content and autoplay to provide a very different social interaction.
#Mastodon is federated…

@cdevroe

I don't have a problem with that. but, again, I'm saying I know how reporters think. and they will see this and say: more difficult to use, more sensitive user base and there's this weird thing where you don't have a single ID. that's all I'm saying. again, I love this service so far and will try my best to abide by its norms.

@Migukin name a social network that a reporter understood? 😉

@cdevroe

that's kind of their purpose when it comes to platforms. If you can get past the dumb reporter reporting on it phase, then you're probably going to be a success. and there's something to be said for organic growth. but don't dismiss the need to see a service from a reporter's point of view. they're an important part of the growth of a service.

@Migukin there are tons of smart, well thought reporters out there. And they clearly understand Mastodon. No need to worry about organic growth with a service like this. It has already succeeded.

@cdevroe

I agree. but.....I generally think everything is horrible so I map out in my head all the ways things could go horribly wrong. :-)