I hear on Bluesky: fuck people who think differently—they play dirty, so we will too. Billionaires? Too disconnected to be relevant. I get the anger. But if we mirror the worst of them, aren’t we proving their point? The win is engaging ideas, not people. We’re all more than one thing.
I think it's a mix. Some people are like that. Others however have genuinely seen people who actually don't care and ruin people's lives as a result of their actions, so I don't blame them for being jaded.
I really dislike this take, but okay, I'll bite. 1. @mcuban.bsky.social failed to engage the original response to his post, instead focusing on the dogpiling (which was *very* tame but okay, sure, we should do less of it, even to billionaires).
2. Having a billion dollars is distinct from being a billionaire. Individual versus class. He is smart enough to know the difference and to understand that by and large, people believe that billionaires are a symptom of a larger problem (www.federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/...), not him personally.
3. He's like the 2nd or 3rd most followed account on bsky. It is statistically inevitable that he's going to get shitty people in his comments. It is *on him* to navigate that; he *largely benefits* from his reach on this platform (example: the COO of the platform is responding to him personally).
4. Fwiw, the idea that health care is fundamentally compatible with private markets with no safety net is in dispute. Yes, it's incredibly complicated, and yes, he has done some good in this area with Cost Plus, but it's a band-aid and he knows it. Why not *start there* instead of doing this?
Mark is right
hey, rose, can you explain to your dear friend mark how blocking works? i think it would massively improve his experience on your site.
Realizing when words stop working and we need to move on to action is a sign of maturity and experience. We coddled, explained and accommodated long enough. What a charmed life you have lived to go on believing that evil can be negotiated with. We'll take it from here.
One of the most empathetic and humanistic people out there is billionaire Gov. Pritzger. I don’t get the blanket bashing of billionaires. Many do good.
I agree, I think we’re each being called on to bravely love and care more for ourselves, each other, wildlife/animals and our shared home thro’ this time. If we keep our focus on that, in our own individual ways, we contribute to the whole in helpful ways.
This feels like a straw man argument. The harsh reality of politics in 2025 is that one side is playing without any inhibitions due to norms, precedent, law, or mutual respect. In that, it’s a losing proposition to presume we can win without an equivalent arsenal of tactics. It’s sad, but true.
counter point: our timelines are so filled with people posting crap from X that we almost never see anyone trying to have an intelligent discussion. Also, Mark Cuban engages with less than .01% of the people who do offer constructive dialog, so there is that
he’s confusing his anecdotal experience with general trend, his experience is going to be different then the average user cause he’s a public figure and billionaire, i’d expect him to have thicker skin than this. if people are angry they’ll express anger, silencing it won’t solve that, just amplify
Mark is amplifying the dull name callers here. Instead he should use his considerable resources to fund a labeller that hides the stuff that irritates him, then others can opt into using it to get Bluesky, the Cuban filtered version. Using search to find a guy to argue with was a Twitter thing.
Maybe Mark Cuban specifically just isn't as likable to most people as he believes himself to be? Are many others besides him complaining about conversation degradation here? Like, isn't this where scientists are flocking, for instance?
This is one of the problematic characteristics of online billionaires I think. They believe themselves to be very self-important because of their monetary value and perceived success, and therefore over-index their perspective on too many things. Maybe Cuban just needs some humility?
I get that many billionaires share certain unsavory traits. But I’ve known Mark for 10 years (when I was a wee founder), and I don’t think he believes he matters because of his $. His email is public; he responds to anyone genuinely willing to engage with him on ideas. Imho he’s a rare, real one
I understand. I'm just saying that he maybe could just be more humble and not constantly make grand statements about the overall condition of the Bluesky user experience with his massive profile based solely on his experience.
Many of us thoroughly enjoy the app but don't have his megaphone to project how we feel, and we don't necessarily assume how most others feel about the app just from our interactions. We should all be weary of over-indexing our perspectives, and it seems many struggle with this.
Agree x 2. I disagree with him on some things, but I think he's thoughtful and trying to do good. And double yes on let's not make Bluesky a cauldron of groupthink and intolerance.
You think this because you still need to realise the amount of sheer cruelty it takes to become a billionnaire.
What you see, is what you like.
I don't find Mark Cuban to be very intelligent, therefore I don't see how having an intelligent conversation with him would be possible. Having a lot of money does not mean I have to pay attention to you.
Sounds like he needs to setup his own safe space. Then he can moderate it to his liking. Isn’t that exactly the promise of the protocol?
Perhaps not giving people the tools to label people by belief and subsequently block them on a large scale would help towards tolerating people with different beliefs. The community-led "moderation system" has to go, and be replaced with something far more accountable.
I do think we need more checks and balances here w our community labeling system
What would that look like
The EU prohibits discrimination based on sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age, and sexual orientation. Any shared block list would have to avoid doing that - and I can't see a way of guaranteeing that. Community block lists and labels should go completely.
Mainly directed at Rose around the “more accountability” point. But I suppose a benefit of this system is that if Bluesky did any of the things you’re proposing we’d just keep things as is for Blacksky and users can then decide where they want to go.
This is my own view and not at all indicative of what’s happening at bsky: if we reduce context collapse—so people see who made lists and what they stand for—then reputable lists will rise to the top.
i am confused. where are lists without visible owners now?
honestly, being able to see the accounts that create and contribute to lists should already be a thing
Community notes on lists + the ability to add a record from someone’s repo as “provenance” for a list inclusion or labeling decisions would go a long way toward evaluating lists
Unfortunately that assumes that people aren't discriminatory by nature. Everyone has prejudices, these lists and labels just allow them to practice them on a large scale.
Simple solution: make lists and labels consensual on both sides - i.e. no one can label me or put me on a list without my agreement. Lists and labels can be useful - but are wide open to abuse if they are used for unofficial moderation.
The problem is defining 'reputable'. Before the mainstreaming of bluesky there was a big scandal of the biggest moderation list creator abusing their power, someone else linked to it was a fed .etc .etc --> supremely messy fall out.
And when it comes to beliefs, one person's "reputable" is another's "unconscionable". Moderation simply cannot be done on a community basis. It has to be run by someone on a Bluesky paycheque so at least there's some legal accountability.
Sure, but the community will vocally rebel. Bsky has to look out for adhering to app store guidelines, whereas the community is only interested in moral guidelines. The community knows what it wants to say to JK Rowling, but it will get the app banned if Bsky endorses it.
That's pretty much why the EU switched away from holding the community responsible for their own content on any given platform, to holding the platforms responsible for what happens on it. Trusting the community to "do the right thing" just doesn't work out well.
…maybe I’m not as up on EU law as I ought to be but how would it be enforceable on a community driven feature?
The EU would determine which organisation is responsible for providing that framework, or which organisations are relying on that framework, and ensure that they're not allowing the outsourcing of discrimination on their systems.
and also with moderation lists? 🙏 it really sucks to be put on a moderation list that's spreading lies about who you are, and that's happened a couple of times to me recently
Indeed, I had the same experience.
Yea same I think them trying to hide them in the UI a few months ago (or whenever that was) was to try combat this but I don’t think it did much
if @moderation.bsky.app actually did hide all the lists from public view that make unfounded, false and malicious claims about people, that would be a great start but even though I've reported ones that do, they don't seem to hide them 😒
Yea idk how they actually implemented it… prob not well tho lol
I reported this one (with an alt) more than two weeks ago, and it hasn't been hidden yet 😒
Wtfff
To what end? There’s already absolute transparency on the lists and labels. Using them is entirely opt in. The people who want a free for all can already have it, so who would further checks and balances really serve?
Thank you for replying to this thread so I can block these people before they bother me directly.
oh, you cooked
Alignment with EU regulations, specifically prevention of discrimination.
No. It’s the best thing about the place. My favourite, in fact.
I don’t think there’s much wrong with how the labelling works? I mean personally I just use it to be able to tell when someone follows certain accounts to get a better handle on what perspective they might be coming from, so in that way it seems pretty useful rather than harmful to discussion?
I suggest doing a deep data analysis on the labels and types of people involved when it comes to any block list subscribed to by, say, 100,000+ people. Don't be surprised if they're blocking by race, politics and/or beliefs. In the EU, expression of these are protected...
This is true. I want to learn from different points of view, not to "win a discussion".
you are now my favorite person just because you swore and it looks badass for the app tell em Rose 🌹
These "grab bag signifier" trolls are a part of the problem and need to be weeded out: bsky.app/profile/brai...
I think Bluesky still has very open discussions 😊 Problem with short comments in general is that it sometimes is to short for complex issues 😊. So we still need to learn how to navigate through that. Being patient, humble, kind and polite is a good first step.
Too many examples of societies falling into authoritarianism through democratic processes abused and manipulated by groups not interested in democracy. You know this.
That a billionaire whining that people are mean to him gets support from the Bluesky CPO disproves his point. If you have dogshit ideas you should be yelled at! It shouldnt matter how rich you are