Official Twitter Thread (1 Viewer)

[Ilov80s]

I actually unfollowed Elon yesterday. He posts a LOT and it became way too much. I think Elon is a genius from a business point of view but my God I don't need to see every single thought in his head.

I also stopped following him awhile ago. Hr is definitely not efficient in his posting.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

I won’t join Bluesky because it’s basically the same viewpoint. I personally want differing viewpoints

I kinda think it's funny people bailing on X, same as all the folks who bailed after 2020 and went to Truth Social. You're just going to your own echo chamber. Stick around and stand your ground, make your point and fight for it.

I think what you need to understand is that a lot of people want to read, and some of them want to discuss things, all in a way that doesn't involve standing their ground and fighting.

Exactly. Like the FFA.

 

[Mitchie]

See y'all on Twitter by Christmas. It'll still be there. Just like when they said it would end when Elon fired 90% of the staff. Yet it still worked exactly the same.

Twitter is still the easiest way to get and send information on the planet. It's not going anywhere.

If it's exactly the same why are profits and revenue declining each year, esp with all the money they're saving on the decreased head count?

 

[Zeppelin]

I just want what Twitter was.

Those days are gone.

 

[titusbramble]

I won’t join Bluesky because it’s basically the same viewpoint. I personally want differing viewpoints

I kinda think it's funny people bailing on X, same as all the folks who bailed after 2020 and went to Truth Social. You're just going to your own echo chamber. Stick around and stand your ground, make your point and fight for it.

Eh, it's just a social media site. At this point, it's designed mainly for people who voluntarily want to be exposed to a broad array of views. Some people don't like that, and that's fine. They would probably like some other site better. There's a market out there for Blue Sky and Truth Social.

Is blue sky meant to be politically slanted like truth social? I haven’t seen one political post yet.

I have seen a screenshot of a blatantly non controversial post being blocked, seemingly because it goes against a viewpoint only held by the far left. So yes, it is politically slanted.

 

[djmich]

I actually unfollowed Elon yesterday. He posts a LOT and it became way too much. I think Elon is a genius from a business point of view but my God I don't need to see every single thought in his head.

Yah, he's posting too much. Its mostly retweets at this point, some of it is interesting, but would prefer he curate things better lol.

 

[FairWarning]

I won’t join Bluesky because it’s basically the same viewpoint. I personally want differing viewpoints

I kinda think it's funny people bailing on X, same as all the folks who bailed after 2020 and went to Truth Social. You're just going to your own echo chamber. Stick around and stand your ground, make your point and fight for it.

Eh, it's just a social media site. At this point, it's designed mainly for people who voluntarily want to be exposed to a broad array of views. Some people don't like that, and that's fine. They would probably like some other site better. There's a market out there for Blue Sky and Truth Social.

Is blue sky meant to be politically slanted like truth social? I haven’t seen one political post yet.

I have seen a screenshot of a blatantly non controversial post being blocked, seemingly because it goes against a viewpoint only held by the far left. So yes, it is politically slanted.

That happens to me every week there.

 

[FairWarning]

See y'all on Twitter by Christmas. It'll still be there. Just like when they said it would end when Elon fired 90% of the staff. Yet it still worked exactly the same.

Twitter is still the easiest way to get and send information on the planet. It's not going anywhere.

If it's exactly the same why are profits and revenue declining each year, esp with all the money they're saving on the decreased head count?

Comcast, Disney, and IBM Are Among Advertisers Returning to X After Ad Freeze

IBM, Disney, Warner Bros. Discovery, and Lions Gate Entertainment have collectively spent less than $3.3 million on X.

www.adweek.com

 

[The Kerminator]

I actually unfollowed Elon yesterday. He posts a LOT and it became way too much. I think Elon is a genius from a business point of view but my God I don't need to see every single thought in his head.

I don't even follow Musk and I still see every single thought in his head.

 

[Insein]

See y'all on Twitter by Christmas. It'll still be there. Just like when they said it would end when Elon fired 90% of the staff. Yet it still worked exactly the same.

Twitter is still the easiest way to get and send information on the planet. It's not going anywhere.

If it's exactly the same why are profits and revenue declining each year, esp with all the money they're saving on the decreased head count?

Comcast, Disney, and IBM Are Among Advertisers Returning to X After Ad Freeze

IBM, Disney, Warner Bros. Discovery, and Lions Gate Entertainment have collectively spent less than $3.3 million on X.

www.adweek.com

Yep. Their political stunt backfired. They tried to attack X financially because of who Elon was backing. Now that it's over, those companies want to make money again and X has millions of views for ads available.

 

[Mitchie]

See y'all on Twitter by Christmas. It'll still be there. Just like when they said it would end when Elon fired 90% of the staff. Yet it still worked exactly the same.

Twitter is still the easiest way to get and send information on the planet. It's not going anywhere.

If it's exactly the same why are profits and revenue declining each year, esp with all the money they're saving on the decreased head count?

Comcast, Disney, and IBM Are Among Advertisers Returning to X After Ad Freeze

IBM, Disney, Warner Bros. Discovery, and Lions Gate Entertainment have collectively spent less than $3.3 million on X.

www.adweek.com

Does anyone even bother to read the actual article anymore?

From January to September 2024, marketing intelligence platform MediaRadar found that these brands collectively spent less than $3.3 million on X. This is a 98% year-over-year drop from the $170 million spent during the same period in 2023.

 

[djmich]

I actually unfollowed Elon yesterday. He posts a LOT and it became way too much. I think Elon is a genius from a business point of view but my God I don't need to see every single thought in his head.

Yah, he's posting too much. Its mostly retweets at this point, some of it is interesting, but would prefer he curate things better lol.

I laughed…

Elon

 

[Chemical X]

See y'all on Twitter by Christmas. It'll still be there. Just like when they said it would end when Elon fired 90% of the staff. Yet it still worked exactly the same.

Twitter is still the easiest way to get and send information on the planet. It's not going anywhere.

If it's exactly the same why are profits and revenue declining each year, esp with all the money they're saving on the decreased head count?

Comcast, Disney, and IBM Are Among Advertisers Returning to X After Ad Freeze

IBM, Disney, Warner Bros. Discovery, and Lions Gate Entertainment have collectively spent less than $3.3 million on X.

www.adweek.com

Yep. Their political stunt backfired. They tried to attack X financially because of who Elon was backing. Now that it's over, those companies want to make money again and X has millions of views for ads available.

i do?

 

[fatness]

Apparently there's going to be a new private agency designed to 'cut government waste' which will be run by Musk and another guy. The private agency is soliciting job applications from people who want to work 80 hours a week for free. The catch is that those applications have to be submitted in a particular way on Twitter, a way which necessitates paying Twitter money.

DOGE applicants will need to pay Elon Musk to send him their resume | Fortune

An X premium subscription is required, which could cost up to $16 per month.

fortune.com

"Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (which he runs with Vivek Ramaswamy) put out the call Thursday for “super high-IQ small-government revolutionaries willing to work 80+ hours per week on unglamorous cost-cutting.” As appealing as that job might sound (oh, it’s seemingly unpaid also), the potential conflict came in the instructions about how to apply.

Potential applicants are being instructed to send their resumes to the DOGE account on X via direct message. Under Musk’s changes to that platform, however, only premium subscribers are able to send DMs to the DOGE account. Those run from $8 to $16 per month. Put another way: To even be considered for a role in the department (and the site said only the top 1% of resumes will be reviewed by Musk and Ramaswamy), applicants will have to make a financial contribution to one of Musk’s businesses."

---

 

[Insein]

See y'all on Twitter by Christmas. It'll still be there. Just like when they said it would end when Elon fired 90% of the staff. Yet it still worked exactly the same.

Twitter is still the easiest way to get and send information on the planet. It's not going anywhere.

If it's exactly the same why are profits and revenue declining each year, esp with all the money they're saving on the decreased head count?

Comcast, Disney, and IBM Are Among Advertisers Returning to X After Ad Freeze

IBM, Disney, Warner Bros. Discovery, and Lions Gate Entertainment have collectively spent less than $3.3 million on X.

www.adweek.com

Does anyone even bother to read the actual article anymore?

From January to September 2024, marketing intelligence platform MediaRadar found that these brands collectively spent less than $3.3 million on X. This is a 98% year-over-year drop from the $170 million spent during the same period in 2023.

Yes. They all stopped spending on X up until September because of who Elon associated with. Now they plan to comeback in 2025.

 

[jamny]

See y'all on Twitter by Christmas. It'll still be there. Just like when they said it would end when Elon fired 90% of the staff. Yet it still worked exactly the same.

Twitter is still the easiest way to get and send information on the planet. It's not going anywhere.

Facebook isn't going anywhere either.

I think YouTube is the only social media platform that's unchallengable.

As long as they have Google money and algorithm behind them, YouTube is not going anywhere

Is youtube really considered social media?

 

[djmich]

Apparently there's going to be a new private agency designed to 'cut government waste' which will be run by Musk and another guy. The private agency is soliciting job applications from people who want to work 80 hours a week for free. The catch is that those applications have to be submitted in a particular way on Twitter, a way which necessitates paying Twitter money.

DOGE applicants will need to pay Elon Musk to send him their resume | Fortune

An X premium subscription is required, which could cost up to $16 per month.

fortune.com

"Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (which he runs with Vivek Ramaswamy) put out the call Thursday for “super high-IQ small-government revolutionaries willing to work 80+ hours per week on unglamorous cost-cutting.” As appealing as that job might sound (oh, it’s seemingly unpaid also), the potential conflict came in the instructions about how to apply.

Potential applicants are being instructed to send their resumes to the DOGE account on X via direct message. Under Musk’s changes to that platform, however, only premium subscribers are able to send DMs to the DOGE account. Those run from $8 to $16 per month. Put another way: To even be considered for a role in the department (and the site said only the top 1% of resumes will be reviewed by Musk and Ramaswamy), applicants will have to make a financial contribution to one of Musk’s businesses."

---

Zero government waste created

 

[IvanKaramazov]

See y'all on Twitter by Christmas. It'll still be there. Just like when they said it would end when Elon fired 90% of the staff. Yet it still worked exactly the same.

Twitter is still the easiest way to get and send information on the planet. It's not going anywhere.

Facebook isn't going anywhere either.

I think YouTube is the only social media platform that's unchallengable.

As long as they have Google money and algorithm behind them, YouTube is not going anywhere

Is youtube really considered social media?

"Social media" probably isn't the right term, but "alternate media" seems pretty accurate. It's very easy to access points of view that you won't encounter in the legacy media, on both sides of the aisle.

 

[rockaction]

I won’t join Bluesky because it’s basically the same viewpoint. I personally want differing viewpoints

I kinda think it's funny people bailing on X, same as all the folks who bailed after 2020 and went to Truth Social. You're just going to your own echo chamber. Stick around and stand your ground, make your point and fight for it.

I think what you need to understand is that a lot of people want to read, and some of them want to discuss things, all in a way that doesn't involve standing their ground and fighting.

Then why leave after a distinctly political event unless you were influenced by it? He doesn’t need to understand anything. He’s got it pretty spot-on.

I’m not mad. I don’t care at all. Almost to the nth I don’t care. In fact, I only chime in because of your tone. But there is whole lot of hurt going around and it sure seems like the proverbial playground and the kid who takes his ball and goes home. Perhaps it was a moment of consciousness that these people could no longer avoid and it was the straw that broke the back. I’m open to considering that, but it’s such an utter freaking stretch. And it still has an air defying an otherwise fallacious “after this, therefore because of this."

Some people loooooooved the conflict. As much as I like Mina Kimes (I only mention her because she was mentioned), she courts controversy in a very subtle yet still-ESPN way. Forget that example, though. I’m finding it hard to believe that a mass exodus after an election isn’t a political move akin to Truth Social.

In fact, it’s worse because it has no person that got banned like Trump got banned. He and the right at least had a reason. This reasoning is just “Well, I don’t like the slant so I’m going to my own echo chamber.”

I find it hard to assign pure motives to those engaging for a long time on Twitter and then just deciding to disappear after an election.

 

[fatness]

In fact, I only chime in because of your tone.

You sure projected a lot into one sentence I typed.

 

[rockaction]

In fact, I only chime in because of your tone.

You sure projected a lot into one sentence I typed.

I’m more than willing to let you have the last word or only post one more rebuttal (after which I assume you’ll rebut) if you feel like the brevity with which you posted limited your argument.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

I won’t join Bluesky because it’s basically the same viewpoint. I personally want differing viewpoints

I kinda think it's funny people bailing on X, same as all the folks who bailed after 2020 and went to Truth Social. You're just going to your own echo chamber. Stick around and stand your ground, make your point and fight for it.

I think what you need to understand is that a lot of people want to read, and some of them want to discuss things, all in a way that doesn't involve standing their ground and fighting.

Then why leave after a distinctly political event unless you were influenced by it? He doesn’t need to understand anything. He’s got it pretty spot-on.

I’m not mad. I don’t care at all. Almost to the nth I don’t care. In fact, I only chime in because of your tone. But there is whole lot of hurt going around and it sure seems like the proverbial playground and the kid who takes his ball and goes home. Perhaps it was a moment of consciousness that these people could no longer avoid and it was the straw that broke the back. I’m open to considering that, but it’s such an utter freaking stretch. And it still has an air defying an otherwise fallacious "before this, therefore because of this."

Some people loooooooved the conflict. As much as I like Mina Kimes (I only mention her because she was mentioned), she courts controversy in a very subtle yet still-ESPN way. Forget that example, though. I’m finding it hard to believe that a mass exodus after an election isn’t a political move akin to Truth Social.

In fact, it’s worse because it has no person that got banned like Trump got banned. He and the right at least had a reason. This reasoning is just “Well, I don’t like the slant so I’m going to my own echo chamber.”

I find it hard to assign pure motives to those engaging for a long time on Twitter and then just deciding to disappear after an election.

You and I are obviously on the same general side here, so this is a good opportunity for me to try to put a charitable spin on the other side.

There's a "free speech" continuum out there. Consider the FFA. This is heavily-moderated forum by internet standards. This place has always been moderated with a PG filter. (It used to be PG-13, but regardless, it's always been SFW). For the past couple of years, it's had an anti-politics moderation policy. But it's not moderated based on viewpoint. RW and LW posters are moderated the same way, at least as far as I can tell.

When you get to X vs. Bluesky, this is an easy call for people like you and me. Obviously we prefer X. But suppose you're a progressive, or somebody who is especially sensitive to "offensive" content. There's a real trade-off here.

X: Lightly moderated. You can read and post pretty much whatever you want. You will be exposed to viewpoints that challenge yours. The downside is that you will also see content that most would consider hateful, offensive, extreme, etc.

Bluesky: Heavily moderated, with a LW thumb on the scale. You're going to be exposed mainly to LW points of view. If you're a progressive, you won't see much content that would offend you. The downside is that it's an echo chamber.

For a lot of people -- not us -- they're being asked to choose between a platform that errs a more on the side of "free speech" than they'd like, versus a platform that errs more on the side of "safety" than they'd like. I can't really relate well to the people who choose the echo chamber, but I get it on an intellectual level. There is a lot of wrongthink on X, and it's just a fact of life that a lot of people are going to opt against that.

 

[rockaction]

I won’t join Bluesky because it’s basically the same viewpoint. I personally want differing viewpoints

I kinda think it's funny people bailing on X, same as all the folks who bailed after 2020 and went to Truth Social. You're just going to your own echo chamber. Stick around and stand your ground, make your point and fight for it.

I think what you need to understand is that a lot of people want to read, and some of them want to discuss things, all in a way that doesn't involve standing their ground and fighting.

Then why leave after a distinctly political event unless you were influenced by it? He doesn’t need to understand anything. He’s got it pretty spot-on.

I’m not mad. I don’t care at all. Almost to the nth I don’t care. In fact, I only chime in because of your tone. But there is whole lot of hurt going around and it sure seems like the proverbial playground and the kid who takes his ball and goes home. Perhaps it was a moment of consciousness that these people could no longer avoid and it was the straw that broke the back. I’m open to considering that, but it’s such an utter freaking stretch. And it still has an air defying an otherwise fallacious "before this, therefore because of this."

Some people loooooooved the conflict. As much as I like Mina Kimes (I only mention her because she was mentioned), she courts controversy in a very subtle yet still-ESPN way. Forget that example, though. I’m finding it hard to believe that a mass exodus after an election isn’t a political move akin to Truth Social.

In fact, it’s worse because it has no person that got banned like Trump got banned. He and the right at least had a reason. This reasoning is just “Well, I don’t like the slant so I’m going to my own echo chamber.”

I find it hard to assign pure motives to those engaging for a long time on Twitter and then just deciding to disappear after an election.

You and I are obviously on the same general side here, so this is a good opportunity for me to try to put a charitable spin on the other side.

There's a "free speech" continuum out there. Consider the FFA. This is heavily-moderated forum by internet standards. This place has always been moderated with a PG filter. (It used to be PG-13, but regardless, it's always been SFW). For the past couple of years, it's had an anti-politics moderation policy. But it's not moderated based on viewpoint. RW and LW posters are moderated the same way, at least as far as I can tell.

When you get to X vs. Bluesky, this is an easy call for people like you and me. Obviously we prefer X. But suppose you're a progressive, or somebody who is especially sensitive to "offensive" content. There's a real trade-off here.

X: Lightly moderated. You can read and post pretty much whatever you want. You will be exposed to viewpoints that challenge yours. The downside is that you will also see content that most would consider hateful, offensive, extreme, etc.

Bluesky: Heavily moderated, with a LW thumb on the scale. You're going to be exposed mainly to LW points of view. If you're a progressive, you won't see much content that would offend you. The downside is that it's an echo chamber.

For a lot of people -- not us -- they're being asked to choose between a platform that errs a more on the side of "free speech" than they'd like, versus a platform that errs more on the side of "safety" than they'd like. I can't really relate well to the people who choose the echo chamber, but I get it on an intellectual level. There is a lot of wrongthink on X, and it's just a fact of life that a lot of people are going to opt against that.

Fair enough. I have to say that I appreciate your posting. Your points are definitely good ones. So we don’t go back and forth all day and point-by-point (it’s Saturday, and I know you got better things to do) I’ll just say that I had typed out a response to fatness that had taken this into consideration, but I decided instead to offer up the chance for him to rebut beer30's point in more detail. It seemed more gentlemanly and fair. He had indeed only gotten a sentence or two.

But I get your points and I think they’re right. The two things I’d caution against is that I’m not sure I’d prefer X to Bluesky. I think I’d prefer X and my moments on Bluesky were immediately a visceral dislike for it, so you’re probably spot-on there, too, but someday you might catch me preferring it for other reasons other than viewpoint.

The second thing is that the timing of the exodus is suspect. If all those things you mention were so anathema to one’s constitution, one should have left a while ago. I used two examples: David French and Julian Sanchez. They’ve been gone for a while (one because of the tone and tenor of the place, the other due to the Musk element, moderation, and the group herding aspect). Those are decisions that don’t seem to come from either a foot stomp about the election or a lemming leap when everybody else leaves.

And that’s about it. That’s (amazingly) as concise as I can be.

 

[fatness]

In fact, I only chime in because of your tone.

You sure projected a lot into one sentence I typed.

I’m more than willing to let you have the last word or only post one more rebuttal (after which I assume you’ll rebut) if you feel like the brevity with which you posted limited your argument.

I was just surprised to hear my mom's voice coming out of your post: "You watch your tone, fatness" followed by a very serious mom-type lecturing.

 

[rockaction]

In fact, I only chime in because of your tone.

You sure projected a lot into one sentence I typed.

I’m more than willing to let you have the last word or only post one more rebuttal (after which I assume you’ll rebut) if you feel like the brevity with which you posted limited your argument.

I was just surprised to hear my mom's voice coming out of your post: "You watch your tone, fatness" followed by a very serious mom-type lecturing.

Fair enough. Heh. Have you eaten your Brussels sprouts?

 

[TennesseeJed]

In fact, it’s worse because it has no person that got banned like Trump got banned. He and the right at least had a reason. This reasoning is just “Well, I don’t like the slant so I’m going to my own echo chamber

I am not sure I agree, but let's say that is true. So what?

When everyone left for Truth Social, I don't recall a big hue and cry about people abandoning Twitter. I'd go so far and say, nobody cared. So, why is it now an issue if people leave for Bluesky?

A lot of people have been looking for an alternative platform to Twitter since Musk bought the place. A few have popped up, and never stuck. Bluesky could be the same - a short term bubble, that ends up not being what people are looking for.

But, who cares if people leave twitter for a different community?

 

[rockaction]

But, who cares if people leave twitter for a different community?

You’re dangerously close to “Why do you care?” territory.

That said, if I do accept your implied (only implied) premise that the people who care aren’t the ones leaving, then I’d say this:

Here, have an essay. Substitute “college students” for “Twitter journalists” and you’ve got the same idea for why people are talking about it.

You Can't Just Say "Oh, That Doesn't Matter" About Every Single Political Question

is it really irrelevant, or would you rather just avoid talking about it?

freddiedeboer.substack.com

If I were to not concede the assumptive point I’d say that it’s really the people who are leaving that are making the most noise, not the people they’re leaving behind. The people they’re leaving behind probably are saying “good riddance” to most of them. So there’s that, also. I think you’re portraying it like the people laughing/complaining/taunting are East Germany or East Germanic in spirit.

I can almost assure you they’re not. They’re—frankly—calling them a diminutive for kitty cats, for lack of a better word or phrase.

 

[OrganizedChaos]

I follow some sports (primarily FF) accounts, a few pet related ones, and a handful of news ones. It seems like a few months back my "For you" tab, default one, just started getting an inordinate number of postings from accounts I would never be interested in. I finally a few weeks ago got tired of it and started blocking accounts for the first time. Unfortunately that doesn't help as they just get replaced by others. For me to keep my sanity, I think I just need to expand who I follow and then always just go to the "following" tab and ignore the others. Sucks because I have found other accounts worth watching thru "For You" that I would have otherwise missed but I am tired of constantly dealing with it.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

But, who cares if people leave twitter for a different community?

You’re dangerously close to “Why do you care?” territory.

That said, if I do accept your implied (only implied) premise that the people who care aren’t the ones leaving, then I’d say this:

Here, have an essay. Substitute “college students” for “Twitter journalists” and you’ve got the same idea for why people are talking about it.

You Can't Just Say "Oh, That Doesn't Matter" About Every Single Political Question

is it really irrelevant, or would you rather just avoid talking about it?

freddiedeboer.substack.com

If I were to not concede the assumptive point I’d say that it’s really the people who are leaving that are making the most noise, not the people they’re leaving behind. The people they’re leaving behind probably are saying “good riddance” to most of them. So there’s that, also. I think you’re portraying it like the people laughing/complaining/taunting are East Germany or East Germanic in spirit.

I can almost assure you they’re not. They’re—frankly—calling them a diminutive for kitty cats, for lack of a better word or phrase.

To my considerable frustration, the most common response at the time was not to say “those politics that the college students at elite colleges express, they’re the right politics.” Most people, even most left-leaning people, did not defend campus politics on the merits; had they done so, we could have had a productive debate. No, most people, especially in the media, said some version of “they’re just college kids, it’s just crazy places like Yale, it doesn’t matter, why do you care?”

There was a guy in the PSF who made this exact argument constantly, basically verbatim. I sometimes wonder what happened to that guy, and what he's been thinking about the past couple of weeks. I wonder if he's learned anything.

 

[belljr]

People sure love to argue over the dumbest stuff

 

[rockaction]

Heh. That essay I posted is gold. Why Twitter matters, and why people care.

“Recently, Twitter’s stranglehold on media culture has been seriously challenged. But there’s no question that since, say, the 2008 presidential election, Twitter has had more of an influence on professional media than any individual person or publication. And so how can you simply dismiss the importance of that network and what gets said on it? #MeToo was, before it was anything else, a social media campaign. (That’s why it starts with a hashtag!) Are you really going to say that had no effect on Hollywood in the past five years? Really? And yet any time I refer to anything that happens on Twitter, ever, I get a lot of performative eye-rolling from readers. If I speak in general terms, they say I haven’t provided evidence. If I screencap specific individual tweets, they say “oh those are just a few random people.” And it’s transparently the case that they do so because they don’t want to grapple with the specific point I’m making, or they don’t want to deal with the irrefutable power that distributed opinion has in our society, or both. But as Niels Bohr supposedly said about his lucky horseshoe, the power of cultural change works whether you believe in it or not.” - Freddie DeBoer

 

[TennesseeJed]

But, who cares if people leave twitter for a different community?

You’re dangerously close to “Why do you care?” territory.

That said, if I do accept your implied (only implied) premise that the people who care aren’t the ones leaving, then I’d say this:

Here, have an essay. Substitute “college students” for “Twitter journalists” and you’ve got the same idea for why people are talking about it.

You Can't Just Say "Oh, That Doesn't Matter" About Every Single Political Question

is it really irrelevant, or would you rather just avoid talking about it?

freddiedeboer.substack.com

If I were to not concede the assumptive point I’d say that it’s really the people who are leaving that are making the most noise, not the people they’re leaving behind. The people they’re leaving behind probably are saying “good riddance” to most of them. So there’s that, also. I think you’re portraying it like the people laughing/complaining/taunting are East Germany or East Germanic in spirit.

I can almost assure you they’re not. They’re—frankly—calling them a diminutive for kitty cats, for lack of a better word or phrase.

I think you will find that many of the people who are dipping their toes into other venues - fall into two categories: 1) Content providers - those people with large followings, and who are also subject to the most abuse - such as being called "a diminutive for kitty cats, for lack of a better word or phrase"; and, 2) people who are missing the content providers and are looking for better discourse than "a diminutive for kitty cats, for lack of a better word or phrase."

I have no idea how this all shakes out. I am on both sites for the moment, but my twitter activity is definitely slowing down. I doubt I am alone, but I have no idea the size of the migration, nor whether it will stick - but don't mistake this migration as reactionary to the election - people have been looking for an alternative platform for years.

I think Twitter is dying on the vine. It will never completely die - hell ,myspace still exists. But, the blue check marks are actively pushing people away - and then complaining when those people leave. Be careful what you ask for...

 

[rockaction]

I think Twitter is dying on the vine. It will never completely die

I also think it is dying. And I’m not sure it will affect me at all. I don’t know that I care. It was funny to watch journalists and pundits held accountable for a brief moment in time but I never thought that would last.

Yes, people have been looking for a new platform for a while. I get that. But the election is at least a tipping point. That’s not really even debatable.

 

[Eephus]

I think you will find that many of the people who are dipping their toes into other venues - fall into two categories: 1) Content providers - those people with large followings, and who are also subject to the most abuse - such as being called "a diminutive for kitty cats, for lack of a better word or phrase"; and, 2) people who are missing the content providers and are looking for better discourse than "a diminutive for kitty cats, for lack of a better word or phrase."

I have no idea how this all shakes out. I am on both sites for the moment, but my twitter activity is definitely slowing down. I doubt I am alone, but I have no idea the size of the migration, nor whether it will stick - but don't mistake this migration as reactionary to the election - people have been looking for an alternative platform for years.

My use of Twitter/Bluesky/Whatever is mostly passive. I'm there to consume content, not engage with strangers.

If enough content providers migrate over to sustain Bluesky, I'll stick around. Right now I'm straddling two platforms without a ton of duplication. Starter packs are good to get a Bluesky feed going but they come with some chaff that I need to unfollow. I doubt I'll ever leave Twitter completely--I still visit Facebook occasionally to see what I posted in 2009 or what Mrs. Eephus is up to online.

 

[TennesseeJed]

Yes, people have been looking for a new platform for a while. I get that. But the election is at least a tipping point. That’s not really even debatable.

Honestly - I don't know. Maybe.

I have been on Bluesky for a year now - but I use that term loosely because its only recently that many of the bigger content providers/journalists have been putting more content on BlueSky - so that is driving more of my engagement now. I did not go to bluesky because of the election - but I have spent more time there after the election. But, I don't know what was driving the content providers decisions.

Eventually the bots and trolls will follow people over to bluesky - it's inevitable. But, for now, I see a lot more positive interaction and discourse than has been on Twitter for years.

 

[TennesseeJed]

I think you will find that many of the people who are dipping their toes into other venues - fall into two categories: 1) Content providers - those people with large followings, and who are also subject to the most abuse - such as being called "a diminutive for kitty cats, for lack of a better word or phrase"; and, 2) people who are missing the content providers and are looking for better discourse than "a diminutive for kitty cats, for lack of a better word or phrase."

I have no idea how this all shakes out. I am on both sites for the moment, but my twitter activity is definitely slowing down. I doubt I am alone, but I have no idea the size of the migration, nor whether it will stick - but don't mistake this migration as reactionary to the election - people have been looking for an alternative platform for years.

My use of Twitter/Bluesky/Whatever is mostly passive. I'm there to consume content, not engage with strangers.

If enough content providers migrate over to sustain Bluesky, I'll stick around. Right now I'm straddling two platforms without a ton of duplication. Starter packs are good to get a Bluesky feed going but they come with some chaff that I need to unfollow. I doubt I'll ever leave Twitter completely--I still visit Facebook occasionally to see what I posted in 2009 or what Mrs. Eephus is up to online.

Yeah - I had a pretty good F1 set of content providers that I follow on twitter. I used an F1 starter pack on bluesy - and, I spent more time unfollowing irrelevant accounts. But, I can see some value in building up the content.


(I only follow about 300 people on twitter, some work, some sports, fantasy soccer, Spurs, F1, etc., some personal, some political, some journalists, and some I just picked up over the years - I'd be happy to build a small but relevant group on Bluesky. )

 

[The Kerminator]

People sure love to argue over the dumbest stuff

No they don't!

 

[Eephus]

Yeah - I had a pretty good F1 set of content providers that I follow on twitter. I used an F1 starter pack on bluesy - and, I spent more time unfollowing irrelevant accounts. But, I can see some value in building up the content.


(I only follow about 300 people on twitter, some work, some sports, fantasy soccer, Spurs, F1, etc., some personal, some political, some journalists, and some I just picked up over the years - I'd be happy to build a small but relevant group on Bluesky. )

I've added a Formula 1 feed that seems to be almost exclusively related content but a lot of it are replies to those "get to know me" questionnaires. The big motorsports accounts are still pretty much exclusively on Twitter still. It's an off-week for F1 but I had very little Macau or MotoGP content in my Bluesky. It's very early days - I think we'll have to wait until next season to get a better picture.

In general, American sports seem to be better populated on Bluesky than the global/Euro ones. There was an influx of baseball content providers this week but I'm seeing anything comparable for soccer or motosports.

 

[FairWarning]

In fact, it’s worse because it has no person that got banned like Trump got banned. He and the right at least had a reason. This reasoning is just “Well, I don’t like the slant so I’m going to my own echo chamber

I am not sure I agree, but let's say that is true. So what?

When everyone left for Truth Social, I don't recall a big hue and cry about people abandoning Twitter. I'd go so far and say, nobody cared. So, why is it now an issue if people leave for Bluesky?

A lot of people have been looking for an alternative platform to Twitter since Musk bought the place. A few have popped up, and never stuck. Bluesky could be the same - a short term bubble, that ends up not being what people are looking for.

But, who cares if people leave twitter for a different community?

Because it’s the big names announcing it. I can’t say I’ve signed ip or left a site because of the actions of an entertainer or athlete. Many do though.

 

[NewlyRetired]

In general, American sports seem to be better populated on Bluesky than the global/Euro ones. There was an influx of baseball content providers this week but I'm seeing anything comparable for soccer or motosports.

Some of the Euro soccer ones are just starting to convert this week. A large portion of the Bundesliga stuff left X for Bluesky just in the last couple of days.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

I won’t join Bluesky because it’s basically the same viewpoint. I personally want differing viewpoints

I kinda think it's funny people bailing on X, same as all the folks who bailed after 2020 and went to Truth Social. You're just going to your own echo chamber. Stick around and stand your ground, make your point and fight for it.

I think what you need to understand is that a lot of people want to read, and some of them want to discuss things, all in a way that doesn't involve standing their ground and fighting.

Then why leave after a distinctly political event unless you were influenced by it? He doesn’t need to understand anything. He’s got it pretty spot-on.

I’m not mad. I don’t care at all. Almost to the nth I don’t care. In fact, I only chime in because of your tone. But there is whole lot of hurt going around and it sure seems like the proverbial playground and the kid who takes his ball and goes home. Perhaps it was a moment of consciousness that these people could no longer avoid and it was the straw that broke the back. I’m open to considering that, but it’s such an utter freaking stretch. And it still has an air defying an otherwise fallacious "before this, therefore because of this."

Some people loooooooved the conflict. As much as I like Mina Kimes (I only mention her because she was mentioned), she courts controversy in a very subtle yet still-ESPN way. Forget that example, though. I’m finding it hard to believe that a mass exodus after an election isn’t a political move akin to Truth Social.

In fact, it’s worse because it has no person that got banned like Trump got banned. He and the right at least had a reason. This reasoning is just “Well, I don’t like the slant so I’m going to my own echo chamber.”

I find it hard to assign pure motives to those engaging for a long time on Twitter and then just deciding to disappear after an election.

You and I are obviously on the same general side here, so this is a good opportunity for me to try to put a charitable spin on the other side.

There's a "free speech" continuum out there. Consider the FFA. This is heavily-moderated forum by internet standards. This place has always been moderated with a PG filter. (It used to be PG-13, but regardless, it's always been SFW). For the past couple of years, it's had an anti-politics moderation policy. But it's not moderated based on viewpoint. RW and LW posters are moderated the same way, at least as far as I can tell.

When you get to X vs. Bluesky, this is an easy call for people like you and me. Obviously we prefer X. But suppose you're a progressive, or somebody who is especially sensitive to "offensive" content. There's a real trade-off here.

X: Lightly moderated. You can read and post pretty much whatever you want. You will be exposed to viewpoints that challenge yours. The downside is that you will also see content that most would consider hateful, offensive, extreme, etc.

Bluesky: Heavily moderated, with a LW thumb on the scale. You're going to be exposed mainly to LW points of view. If you're a progressive, you won't see much content that would offend you. The downside is that it's an echo chamber.

For a lot of people -- not us -- they're being asked to choose between a platform that errs a more on the side of "free speech" than they'd like, versus a platform that errs more on the side of "safety" than they'd like. I can't really relate well to the people who choose the echo chamber, but I get it on an intellectual level. There is a lot of wrongthink on X, and it's just a fact of life that a lot of people are going to opt against that.

IK: who do you follow on X? Just curious, as I trust your judgment and enjoy your posts. Glad to take this to PMs if you prefer.

 

[fatness]

When everyone left for Truth Social, I don't recall a big hue and cry about people abandoning Twitter. I'd go so far and say, nobody cared. So, why is it now an issue if people leave for Bluesky?

One possibility is that some people just want to fight, and when someone they see as an opponent just walks away, they get angry.

 

[fatness]

I follow some sports (primarily FF) accounts, a few pet related ones, and a handful of news ones. It seems like a few months back my "For you" tab, default one, just started getting an inordinate number of postings from accounts I would never be interested in. I finally a few weeks ago got tired of it and started blocking accounts for the first time. Unfortunately that doesn't help as they just get replaced by others. For me to keep my sanity, I think I just need to expand who I follow and then always just go to the "following" tab and ignore the others. Sucks because I have found other accounts worth watching thru "For You" that I would have otherwise missed but I am tired of constantly dealing with it.

I take the opposite approach because that works better for what I want. I follow no one, never 'like' anything, never post, and remove as much as I can from my landing page. I pretty much know what I want when I go there --- either to follow a link in an article I'm reading elsewhere, or to search for a particular person who I think has some current news.

 

[The Z Machine]

I think people who encounter trolling or vitriol on Twitter are probably getting into the replies and comments, which is always going to be a mistake. Its like trying to have a meaningful discussion on reddit - a complete waste of time whether its sports, entertainment, politics or whatever. The only way I can use Twitter is to follow quality accounts, read the top line comments and maybe follow to a linked article or whatever, but never engage.

This is a very good point. I strongly agree.

Yeah, we use these platforms a bit differently and that is fine. Personally, being able to actually ask questions/interact with knowledge folks is the main appeal.

Go to reddit if you want actual useful information on something.

 

[Joe Bryant]

But, who cares if people leave twitter for a different community?

You’re dangerously close to “Why do you care?” territory.

That said, if I do accept your implied (only implied) premise that the people who care aren’t the ones leaving, then I’d say this:

Here, have an essay. Substitute “college students” for “Twitter journalists” and you’ve got the same idea for why people are talking about it.

You Can't Just Say "Oh, That Doesn't Matter" About Every Single Political Question

is it really irrelevant, or would you rather just avoid talking about it?

freddiedeboer.substack.com

If I were to not concede the assumptive point I’d say that it’s really the people who are leaving that are making the most noise, not the people they’re leaving behind. The people they’re leaving behind probably are saying “good riddance” to most of them. So there’s that, also. I think you’re portraying it like the people laughing/complaining/taunting are East Germany or East Germanic in spirit.

I can almost assure you they’re not. They’re—frankly—calling them a diminutive for kitty cats, for lack of a better word or phrase.

To my considerable frustration, the most common response at the time was not to say “those politics that the college students at elite colleges express, they’re the right politics.” Most people, even most left-leaning people, did not defend campus politics on the merits; had they done so, we could have had a productive debate. No, most people, especially in the media, said some version of “they’re just college kids, it’s just crazy places like Yale, it doesn’t matter, why do you care?”

There was a guy in the PSF who made this exact argument constantly, basically verbatim. I sometimes wonder what happened to that guy, and what he's been thinking about the past couple of weeks. I wonder if he's learned anything.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

IK: who do you follow on X? Just curious, as I trust your judgment and enjoy your posts. Glad to take this to PMs if you prefer.

Sure. Here are some folks who I feel fairly comfortable recommending. My criteria for following somebody is they need to post interesting stuff, in good faith, hopefully with a sense of humor. I don't like people who just post on one or two topics incessantly, and I don't like people who are overly negative. For example, I basically agree with @wesyang on the topics he posts about, but it's just too much.

I'll break this down into people who I see as more or less on my side ("red team," very loosely speaking) and bubble-busters ("blue team," very loosely speaking). My "red team" people would have mostly voted for Trump this last time around, but only a handful of them actually belong to team MAGA, and about as many were Harris voters. A few of them are barely even 51% aligned with me but I like them so keep them on the "good guys" list. I put these in alpha order so nobody can nitpick, and there are probably typos:
@asymmetricinfo
@bonchieredstate
@eigenrobot
@fischerking64
@gummibear737
@janecoaston
@neoavatara
@neontaster
@pegobry_en
@pmarca
@politicalmath
@thomaschatwill
@tyler_a_harper
@wanyeburkett
@wil_da_beast630

Here are accounts that I like as bubble-busters. I have lower standards for these accounts. Specifically, I don't mind if they're not funny, and I don't mind a little bit of Yglesias-style bad faith argumentation as long as they aren't pushing outright misinformation in my TL. I'm just looking for high-quality avatars for "the other side."
@armanddoma
@besttrousers
@briannawu (seriously)
@daveweigel
@dilanesper (this is a tiny account, but I highly recommend it)
@jamessurowiecki
@jbarro
@jdcmedlock
@jonathanchait
@mattyglesias
@noahpinion

 

[Balco]

Any suggestions for baseball and football beat writers/fantasy analysts on blue sky?

Just deactivated my X account and switched to blue sky.

I might be a little different than most posting here in that I didn’t use X for anything but sports/fantasy news/analysis. Don’t care for the vitriol on that platform on any other topic.

 

[NewlyRetired]

Any suggestions for baseball and football beat writers/fantasy analysts on blue sky?

Just deactivated my X account and switched to blue sky.

I might be a little different than most posting here in that I didn’t use X for anything but sports/fantasy news/analysis. Don’t care for the vitriol on that platform on any other topic.

try here for starters. This lists a bunch of blue sky starter packs for sports that you can quickly build up who you want to follow. The links on this page when clicked will bring you right to BlueSky where you can choose "All" to follow or choose individually.

9 Bluesky starter packs to help sports fans fill their feeds

You may have noticed that X/Twitter rival Bluesky has started to gain some serious momentum in the last week. More than

ftw.usatoday.com

 

[Alex P Keaton]

IK: who do you follow on X? Just curious, as I trust your judgment and enjoy your posts. Glad to take this to PMs if you prefer.

Sure. Here are some folks who I feel fairly comfortable recommending. My criteria for following somebody is they need to post interesting stuff, in good faith, hopefully with a sense of humor. I don't like people who just post on one or two topics incessantly, and I don't like people who are overly negative. For example, I basically agree with @wesyang on the topics he posts about, but it's just too much.

I'll break this down into people who I see as more or less on my side ("red team," very loosely speaking) and bubble-busters ("blue team," very loosely speaking). My "red team" people would have mostly voted for Trump this last time around, but only a handful of them actually belong to team MAGA, and about as many were Harris voters. A few of them are barely even 51% aligned with me but I like them so keep them on the "good guys" list. I put these in alpha order so nobody can nitpick, and there are probably typos:
@asymmetricinfo
@bonchieredstate
@eigenrobot
@fischerking64
@gummibear737
@janecoaston
@neoavatara
@neontaster
@pegobry_en
@pmarca
@politicalmath
@thomaschatwill
@tyler_a_harper
@wanyeburkett
@wil_da_beast630

Here are accounts that I like as bubble-busters. I have lower standards for these accounts. Specifically, I don't mind if they're not funny, and I don't mind a little bit of Yglesias-style bad faith argumentation as long as they aren't pushing outright misinformation in my TL. I'm just looking for high-quality avatars for "the other side."
@armanddoma
@besttrousers
@briannawu (seriously)
@daveweigel
@dilanesper (this is a tiny account, but I highly recommend it)
@jamessurowiecki
@jbarro
@jdcmedlock
@jonathanchait
@mattyglesias
@noahpinion

Thx IK. Just spent some time perusing and following most of these feeds. I was already on about 1/3 of them. A couple didn’t really catch me, which is of course totally fine. Appreciate you sharing - my goal is to diversify my current blue bubble while also reading more intellectually honest content within that bubble.

 

[Balco]

Any suggestions for baseball and football beat writers/fantasy analysts on blue sky?

Just deactivated my X account and switched to blue sky.

I might be a little different than most posting here in that I didn’t use X for anything but sports/fantasy news/analysis. Don’t care for the vitriol on that platform on any other topic.

try here for starters. This lists a bunch of blue sky starter packs for sports that you can quickly build up who you want to follow. The links on this page when clicked will bring you right to BlueSky where you can choose "All" to follow or choose individually.

9 Bluesky starter packs to help sports fans fill their feeds

You may have noticed that X/Twitter rival Bluesky has started to gain some serious momentum in the last week. More than

ftw.usatoday.com

Exactly what I was looking for - thanks!