Re:Social Networks: It's worse than you think (2020)
by Buttons840 on Sunday September 12, 2021 @03:25AM
(#28499258)
I've thought of creating a social network that groups people into small groups of 100 or so, by interests and location. I would advertise it as a chance to escape the monoculture and explain that the cost if you must participate a minimum amount, like 1 post or comment per week on average or something. And then you could mix up the groups every year or two. It would have its pros and cons, but it would achieve the goal of letting small groups form and create their own cultures. It would also succeed regardless of its size, so long as you have enough users to form a small group.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Social Networks: It's worse than you think (2020)
by capableweb on Sunday September 12, 2021 @04:14AM
(#28499448)
You're effectively describing Scuttlebutt in a nutshell. Small communities that are formed ad-hoc by peering with each other. "Follow" mean you'll help replicate their content for others who follow them + you. Scuttlebutt is already successful even though it's very small so far. Tags and other things can be used to explore content on the network, as long as you've found an entry-point.
I'm a bit split about spreading the word about Scuttlebutt, I don't want to ruin it since it's already so great. But felt it was very related to what you were writing, so here goes nothing :)
In case you wanna join: https://scuttlebutt.nz/
The client I'm using is https://github.com/ssbc/patchwork
Re:Social Networks: It's worse than you think (2020)
by peakaboo on Sunday September 12, 2021 @04:44AM
(#28499530)
The name is awful. I certainly don't want to spread the word about "scuttlebutt". So I guess that's a good thing, keeps it small and cosy.
Re:Social Networks: It's worse than you think (2020)
by mikro2nd on Sunday September 12, 2021 @07:56AM
(#28500363)
What is so awful about "scuttlebutt"? In the old days, when ships were wooden, real sailors were pressed, etc., etc., every ship had a water container available to the sailors -- a water butt -- bigger than a puncheon but smaller than a tun. So sailors would share gossip (probably about how misguided their management was) -- scuttle -- around the water butt, hence "scuttlebutt".
Where's the "awful"?
eta: Exactly what we today refer to as "water cooler chatter/gossip"
Re:Social Networks: It's worse than you think (2020)
by aendruk on Sunday September 12, 2021 @01:52PM
(#28503254)
Having never been in the old days, the word scuttlebutt isn’t in my vocabulary, but I do know scuttle (scamper) and butt (buttocks). Scampering buttocks, the meaning I would surmise in the absence of your history lesson, is indeed an awful choice of name if the network is aspiring for general appeal.
Re:Social Networks: It's worse than you think (2020)
by chasedehan on Monday September 13, 2021 @10:45AM
(#28512157)
In the US military “scuttlebutt” refers to gossip. So that’s my first reaction to this name.
Re:Social Networks: It's worse than you think (2020)
by capableweb on Sunday September 12, 2021 @05:51AM
(#28499809)
You sound like the same person who could never work on a ship as there is a "poop deck", and you could of course never refer to it as such, poop is a bad word!
Also, never try archery as some people might try to use the word "prickshaft" towards you. The horror.
Re:Social Networks: It's worse than you think (2020)
by ColinWright on Sunday September 12, 2021 @05:54AM
(#28499825)
The first part of what you say is similar to what's happening with some parts of Mastodon. There are many, many small instances that are (apparently) starting to develop their own cultures, but you can still see what other people are saying because of federation.
The ideas of requiring engagement, and mixing the groups, are interesting, but I'm not sure how they'd work. I've seen the "You must engage" idea applied elsewhere without success, so it needs a little more work.
Even so, I think your ideas have promise.