I have no issues whatsoever with people wanting to be on Bluesky; in fact, if it hastens the demise of Twitter/X which now seems beyond repair, I’m personally all for it- as far as politics, cat pictures, thoughts on the world in general etc are concerned
but I don’t understand how moving *science discourse* to a for profit, invite only, platform is in any way compatible with the goals of open science and science reform.
am I missing something?
@UlrikeHahn completely agree. But also recognise that not everyone has the time or motivation to hang around and work out how mastodon works...
That is funny, because Bluesky is really easy to learn:
- hashtags: do not exist.
- DMs: do not exist.
- GDPR complience: does not exist.
- DSA complience: does not exist.
- video upload and player: does not exist.
- account verification: easy.
@Life_is @Ruth_Mottram @UlrikeHahn
I'd join any platform that opened up its engagement algorithm to third-party review. Imagine if you were able to go to a lay-friendly technology site like Wired or Gizmodo and read a competent analysis of how Xwitter decides who sees what and when, taken directly from the source.
