Conversation
Notices
-
Deleted my Voat account. I am 100% convinced that most subverses have already been taken hostage as a means of self-preservation. /v/CriticalThinking is literally filled with pro-big-pharma, anti-marijuana, pro-vaccination submissions, all of which are being posted by the moderator every single day. They also ironically mod /v/medicine and post the same brand of crap there. Can anyone say conflict of interest? The guy is obviously a shill for the so-called "health" industry.
Reddit isn't the only site that's corrupt, and that's because every fucking social media site keeps continuously implementing "features" that mimick society's braindead authority-loving disabilities.
- danri and VegOs ✔♋ like this.
-
The concept of federation needs something more polished for social organizing/conversing and GNU Social is not that thing. PHP + non-native application = just another fad that will fade away. For example, twitter still seems sucessful, but it's rotton on the inside. No content, just marketting. There's a reason bittorrent and mobil apps are so successful - they eliminate the source of the problem -- inconsistency. HTML/CSS may be powerful, but servers should not have any power whatsoever about what fucking colors a text input widget should have. They never get it right anyway.
-
I'm not even referring to voting in general, but the freedom and/or limitations imposed on it. Neither up/down votes should be limited (rather both, if at all), centralization encourages censorship and should be done away with for good as well as moderation (another word for censorship), "categories" (subreddits, subverses, whatever the fuck you want to call them) should be replaced entirely with user-controlled tags, spam prevention should be prioritized via instance authorization (a list of nodes that are allowed to be federated with), and editing/deletion needs to be network-wide (not instance only, which is pathetically broken).
All microblogging and social networking sites are using selectively flawed ideas and should be transformed. Nobody needs 'microblogging', they want socialization, and up/down votes aren't evil -- centralization is.
-
@speeddefrost "Nobody needs 'microblogging', they want socialization"
Thanks for the reminder.
For me this is the last drop to cause renaming of "Microblogging system" references in #AndStatus into "Social networking site".
I think the "site" term sounds simpler and closer to what !andstatus currently lists as "Microblogging systems", than "server", "instance" or "service"?!
-
@andstatus I think not all know what #microblogging is. I take some time to think about a good word for it. Or do you people of the !fediverse have some ideas?
-
#microblogging doesn't make any particular sense to me. Actually, as a user, I don't see sharp borders between microblogging, blogging and social networking.
-
@aroque So how does "Social network" or "Social network instance" sound to you? cc @andstatus
-
@andstatus sounds fine.
-
If you are talking about the naming in #AndStatus, I'd simply go for "Social network". The "site" thing doesn't add much in my opinion, and as @andstatus wrote, there are too many synonyms to get it right :-)
-
If you are talking about the naming in #AndStatus, I'd simply go for "Social network". The "site" thing doesn't add much in my opinion, and as @andstatus wrote, there are too many synonyms to get it right :-)
-
@roland @aroque@gnusocial.no @kaimi@status.kaimi.cc The question is _not_ about "Social network". It's about a general term for an element (one element!) from this list: "Twitter, Pump . io, Quitter . se, Gnucocial . no, ...".
#AndStatus application now calls each a "Microblogging system". I think that "Social networking site" is a much more accurate term... These alternatives to "site" seem less clear or less accurate to me: "server", "instance", "service".
As you can see from the list, "Quitter . se" and "Gnucocial . no" are from the same "Social network". "Pump . io" is a separate network with different "servers"/"instances". Twitter has also thousands of "servers"...
-
@andstatus @blogrobatik@gnusocial.blogrobatik.de Please see clarification to the question in a message I'm replying to.
-
@andstatus but for StatusNet/GnuSoial calling it a "site" is misleading: it should be "network" because it's a network of instances. The same applies to pump.io. And "site" is misleading because that suggests it's all on the web which it isn't. Twitter is a "site" only on the sense it's centralized, but not a network. (Many websites have multiple servers.)
-
@andstatus and what the heck is wrong with "microblogging system" in the first place?
-
@mk I'm not calling "GnuSocial" a site. I'm calling "Quitter . se" a site. I think for 95% of users it _is_ a site ?!
-
@mk "system" is a good term. I don't like "Microblogging" part, because I believe that the main reason we are here is really "socializing" (interacting), not "blogging" (telling) ?!
-
@andstatus maybe it "is" a site but to what extent is that because it's misleading in the first place? I think people should sign up for the *network* and then choose an "instance" (not site) to microblog "from". Personally I find this list of "sites" in the AndStatus dialog confusing.
-
@andstatus I think it's important to use the right terminology for the network right from the start. Twitter is a "service" (not a site) if you consider clients. pump.io and StatusNet/GNUsocial each are "networks" for which you create an account at an instance.
-
@andstatus no, I'm definitely not "blogging" here - but I'm MICROblogging (even if I occasionally use a longer text than 140 char). "social network" is a larger concept that also includes places like LinkedIn etc. Just the fact that we can create conversations (and better than in Twitter and pump.io) is not enough to not call it microblogging. After all, blogging systems also (generally) support conversation, some even threaded conversations (and even sign up for members), and the main pump.io instance is even a limited form of this model in that it only allows "post and comments". Still the pump system is also MICROblogging in that it lacks many features a general blogging system normally has. MICROblogging is a blogging system with an accent on short messages and conversation, but lacking general blogging features.
-
@andstatus Yes. Each Quitter.{no,es,se} is a site, node or instance.
The word "system" could work for #GNUsocial in its entirety (but then I'd prefer "network"). .)
-
@mk I remember Pump.io users strongly disagree with calling Pump.io a "Microblogging..." and told it's a "Social network" :-)
-
"Colloquy tribes"
@andstatus @mk
-
@andstatus @mk Is it in active development?
-
@andstatus well, it's more "blogging" and less "microblogging" than StatusNet/GNUsocial is - but liek I said "social network" is a more generic term which applies to all of the systems (where "network" refers to teh people, rather than to nodes or sites).
-
@dragnucs ask someone who uses it! I actively avoind it. ;-)
-
@mk I check their git repo. Last commit was 8 months ago.
-
@dragnucs so, no - that's a pity
-
@mk "GNU social is a continuation of the StatusNet project. It is social communication software for both public and private communications". Source: https://gnu.io
"GNU social is web software you can use to run your own social network, either privately or publicly" Source: https://gnu.io/social/
-
@dragnucs No visible changes since Autumn 2013 https://github.com/e14n/pump.io/graphs/contributors
-
@andstatus So #movim and and !gnusocial are the most active social networks.
-
@mk "Twitter is an information network made up of 140-character messages called Tweets. It's an easy way to discover the latest news related to subjects you care about"
Source: https://support.twitter.com/articles/215585-getting-started-with-twitter
You see, no system, supported by #AndStatus, calls itself (micro)blogging nowadays...
-
@dragnucs Movim is "The Kickass Social Network" https://movim.eu
-
@andstatus @dragnucs mmm ¿is free software or just open source?
-
@andstatus @mk One of the problems in finding an approriate term is that it has to accomplish two tasks: 1) give a technically adequate descriptive term of what the software does/is; 2) give a pragmatically adequate descriptive term of what the people using the software do w/ it. But why should the searched for term cover both aspects? Wouldn't it suffice to cover what people actually DO w/ the software, and leave the description of the software aside? (Or in some FAQ, for the techies...)
-
@fanta @andstatus It is free software AGPL'ed and stuff.
"Because we think that transparency leads to trust" − movim.eu
-
@andstatus I don't care what they call themsleves (for obvious commercial reasons!) - what I DO with them (and only CAN do with them!) is microblogging. Definitely not blogging.
-
@simsa0 no, what people DO with them will be insufficient - they need to know what they CAN do with them (and what not)
-
@mk @andstatus Your use case is "Communicate with my peers". You are not just microblogging. Or I'd rather say that microblogging is a restrictive view of the main use case.
-
Still for that you don't need the term to describe what the software does. Besides, what ppl do is a function of what they can do w/ it, so that is more or less playing semantics.
-
@simsa0 no, many people use only a limited set of functions because they don't know about the others. Thus describing what the CAN do could alert them to what they didn't know yet.
-
@identlud No, my use case is NOT 'communicate with my peers'. My use case is 'microblogging'. Conversation may follow from that, but not necessarily.
-
In the FAQ yes, in the one-word description not.
-
@mk @identlud @andstatus You don't "micro"blog ... you chat w/ others or broadcast on your own. Both are volatile activities distinguished from the permanence that is involved w/ someing being posted on a blog. This is a river running here not some kind of kunstkammer or letter case ...
-
examples for that assertion?
-
@mk And your microblogging intent is to ?
-
@identlud @mk Communicating doesn't mean per se that a conversation will occur ..
-
@identlud to microblog about (i.e., share) my activities, ideas and findings. For others (anyone) to read. (And react to if they want.)
-
@identlud also blogging (micro or macro) doesn't mean per se that anyone will read it. I do it nevertheless.
-
@identlud and I do mean *share* - I hate private messages in this context (unless in very rare cases absolutely necessary). I don't look at "Messages" unless someone alerts me there is something for me to read.
-
@andstatus looking at the whole thread it seems to me that the common denominator of all the "entries" proposed by #AndStatus is being "social networks" - networks of people. The fact that some of them may be interoperable, or prefer to call themselves services, sites or instances is a technical issue that, imho, need not feature prominently in the UI. But of course to connect to a custom social network you need to specify its "server" and its "type". Just my point of view.
-
@aroque @roland @mmn @mk Yes, now I also see that "Social network" is applied not only to "GNU Social" federation, but to a single "instance" of it. Every single "server/service" is a network of people, collaborating with each other...
speeddefrost
AndStatus
Roland Häder
aroque
ka’imi
Temporary Marjolein
MMN-o ✅⃠
simsa0
التنينوكس
fanta
identlud
All LoadAverage content and data are available under the