as usual, some of it is reasonable pushback that raises some fair points about the drawbacks of capitalism’s hyperfocus on growth, etc. and then a bunch more is angry people finding their latest target to unload on in ways wildly disproportionate to the perceived offense
My takeaway was: If there’s ongoing growth in users but not growth in posting/engagement, that’s a problem. He doesn’t outline it in the post but I think what he’s pointing to is that user migration from other networks has plateaued and Bluesky now has a growing bot infestation.
especially shitty to jump on someone like Matt who has been covering this stuff for absolutely ages now
yeah. i understand some people may see it quote tweeted into their feed and assume it’s from a bad faith troll. and then jump on it with their own assumptions, knowing everyone here will loudly agree. but that dynamic is also sort of the root of the problem i’m describing
somewhat unavoidable when there are no barriers to post. It's almost guaranteed to happen when there are enough people with varying beliefs on the network.
You're just describing the internet.
too much of it, yes! but not all of it, and i'd submit that's not the way it has to be. one upside to bluesky not hyperscaling is that there may still be some room here for the culture to evolve in one direction or another
I don't define Bluesky by the Catch Up feed 🤷 Like, you're describing tactics that create big, popular posts, but this is an app that goes out of its way to deincentivize the monoculture. I didn't see his post until I saw this thread.
Maybe picking a post that was optimized to get a bad reaction isn't actually all that meaningful of an indicator of the app's culture. I follow artists and people I like, and I think it's pretty great here 🤷
that’s great to hear. i would love to think we’re in a world in which social networks can thrive just by being some things to some people rather than all things to all people.
Okay. I don't know why you don't think that. I thought all of the "journalists have capitalist brainrot" takes were exaggerating a bit, but uh...
good grief. i said it’s great to hear you’re enjoying it here. and i expressed hope that maybe we’re in a world where niche networks can thrive. but you assumed it was sarcasm and insulted me. which one of us has brain rot?
I didn't assume it was sarcasm. I assumed that you really want that, but don't believe that we're there.
Very clear most of the negative posts hadn't read the article. Also that I have absolutely no interest in any of the trending topics on Bluesky! & that areas I am interested in (politics, environment etc) has very good engagement. So I wonder if the Bluesky age range is higher than others sites?
You’re describing all social media - Home of Raging Projections.
I think the quick hostility is from folks who've been hearing different versions of this same opinion every few weeks since bsky got going. After a while it starts to feel sus.
There's nothing wrong with focusing on growth when you're comparatively minuscule. Especially in a place that still doesn't have a sustainable business model in place AFAIK.
And particularly when actual use of the site is measurably *falling*. Nobody cares about "traffic at all microblogging sites", they care about whether the people they follow on (and the friends who followed them to) a service stop posting.
Matt isn't someone in peoples lives and the first time they see him attacking their favorite website with, as you rightly note, skewed analysis, perhaps the first website they've ever found where they feel to be a part of it, they're going to post reactively. It's fine. He's a professional.
Matt's audience isn't general everyone. It's weirdos like me on his email list. I wouldn't stress.
Also, he wrote the post to get a response. again. he's a professional. he didn't write it with the hope of getting people to understand what the current growth metrics are. he wrote it to get a reaction.
Yeah, and his analysis of the data seems purposefully worded to spike engagement. There’s plenty of ways to word his findings without saying BlueSky risks becoming a ghost town. He’s playing the time-honored game of rage bait
It gets tedious how this analysis is always framed as a *bluesky problem* and not a *text based social networks have growth issues in 2025, and returns may not be there for participants in 2025* problem.