Skip to main content


I notice this happening on multiple social media sites, and it always contributes to the death of social networks:

1. Progressives tend to be early adopters because they usually create culture
2. Reactionaries tend to be late adopters because they usually consume culture
3. Reactionaries then try to seize power because the culture isn't to their liking
4. Progressives leave because they want to create culture
5. Then reactionaries leave because no culture is being created

Ex: see screenshot.
Needs to hire 5 Freelancers
Are you ready to help #Elon carry the sink?

We represent a #FFF news agency almost expired by the wacky woke in #Frisco but - like a Phoenix - it's rising from the ashes of the 2020 steal.

Be bold, don't let the cancel culture of the woke carrion consumers crater you. They're being flushed into oblivion and their end in night and the new #Twitter freedom is high.

You'll be in charge of taking charge once again in the home of the free, land of the proud, realm of the brave.

Daily tweets, vetting articles for a news stream and and occasional wild hair will be your lair. Not for the weak. All gyrenes looking for gallantry in action are welcom.
What's old is new again. What's happening to Twitter right now already happened to Digg.

Remember the Digg Patriots?

Their attempt to take control of the front page resulted in Digg's doom.

And it's also happening to Facebook. No one goes to Facebook anymore for fresh culture.

When the culture of social media dies, so does the social network.
This entry was edited (2 years ago)
Of course, what I find *more* fascinating is that the people who own social networks and news publications are almost never progressive.

But they know very well to position their sites as a destination for progressivism -- because progressives create the content people want to see.

A good example is Vice Magazine.

The folks who founded it are the most extreme right wing jerks you'll ever meet.

I mean, Vice co-founder Gavin McInnes also founded the Proud Boys.
This entry was edited (2 years ago)
As others have pointed out, the gentrification of social networks echoes the gentrification of real life neighbourhoods too.

But it happens a lot quicker.

Notice that right now on Twitter, progressives are kicking up a fuss.

They don't want to leave.

This is their neighbourhood.

But they'll have to leave -- they don't own Twitter. They've always been renters. The only reason you were ever around was to make the place desirable.

And now you're being evicted!
What I want folks of the #TwitterMigration to consider:

When you join Mastodon, be careful about your role in the potential gentrification of this social network!

I say this because I'm noticing more and more high status folk making this their home.

That's fine.

But before you came, this place had a culture -- a very real and vibrant one.

And now that you're here, other high status people are sure to follow -- those people will try to seize this space!
This entry was edited (2 years ago)
If you want your social media neighbourhood to resist gentrification, you could make it harder for the gentrifiers through one unique trick:

Decentralization!

Specifically by:
1. Creating accounts on small instances.
2. Self-hosting your own instances.
3. Connecting with encrypted peer-to-peer messengers
4. Creating communities built on open protocols -- not platforms

Reactionaries can gentrify one space. They can't gentrify all of them!
This entry was edited (2 years ago)
Someone suggested that no one can be evicted from the Fediverse.

Sure, no one can be evicted from the Fediverse itself, but they can be evicted from individual gentrified instances.

In fact, that's already happened.

I've spoken to a number of folks from underrepresented communities that were told to leave certain instances because their ethnicity/sexuality/gender expression were making others uncomfortable.

Just food for thought for you.
So yeah, if you *don't* want to enable gentrification on the Fediverse, I suggest the following:

1. Report abuse on your instance -- all of it
2. If your instance admin refuses to take action, leave it -- go elsewhere
3. Join *small* instances that best represent your values, or self-host an instance if you want the *best* representation of your values
Someone just said, "Chris, you're being a hypocrite: you're telling everyone to use small instances when you, yourself, are on mastodon.social!"

Well, would it interest you to know that I host *FOUR* different instances?

Two of them are closed, and two of them are open for registrations.

These instances are:

1. peerverse.space
2. atomicpoet.org
3. vancity.social
4. yyj.social

So I am, in fact, putting my money where my mouth is.