Sounds like you're happy with a vBulletin / blog experience.

Mastodon wants to be Twitter, or at least really tries to ape Twitter.

Some people like the big commons experience of Twitter and would like to see that somewhere else.

Nope, it sounds like you want Mastodon to be twitter. Or think that it should be trying to be?

They have a blog & followers and some nomenclature in common. But they're really not that similar at all.

If they weren't using @ notation and "followers" etc people would complain it's too different. But because they're using those things, people also complain that it's not similar enough. Tough situation.

It's just best to think of it as something else. It's federated activity feeds.

Have you looked at Mastodon? Have you not noticed they're called "Toots?"

Personally I hate the "toot" nomenclature. That's something you teach a toddler to say instead of "fart".

"Posts" forever and always.

Except when the assignment or goals change.

I don't know if you recall, but we all thought "tweet" was ridiculous and cringe-worthy back in the day too.

If that is what posts are called on that platform I will not use that platform.

You can call them whatever you want. Most people just say posts. The default mastodon server whimsically says "Toot!" in the button. But, like... run your own server and change it :-)

Why does this name cause such a strong reaction in some people?

Some people hate fun and think the internet needs to be 100% professional at all times and only used by professionals.

It's not even fart. The developer didn't know that was a meaning in the US when he changed the name to that. It's the sound a Mastodon makes. This is 100% people projecting their own assumptions and judging based on that, not anything to do with the project. It's not even a meaning I considered back when he made the change, and it's one of the meanings in the version of English I speak. Folks tell on themselves when they get hung up on this.

It’s ridiculous. Names matter. This is almost as bad as Soylent, or Coq.

I find it funny that this is the only answer from someone affected, and it doesn't even attempt to explain what is wrong with the name, even as a snark.

Soylent: $133m in funding

Coq: still going strong after 33 years

I am not sure your examples make the point you think they make. Names don't seem to matter.

This seems an interesting over-reaction to me. Toot is an onomatopoeia that's as old if not older than the English language. It is enshrined in ancient, common aphorisms such as "tooting one's own horn". It's a childish word certainly, and it is childishly used sometimes for farting jokes in addition to horn noises and trumpeting sounds, which I can understand feels "ridiculous" as in silly (to which I retort once again: it's fun, let people have fun, people can be children on the internet and be silly sometimes) but I can't understand "ridiculous" as you put it in the same context of "bad" much less do I find it comparable to your other examples.

Soylent is a "Torment Nexus" style name, which is bizarre (and yeah, probably bad). (The "Torment Nexus" meme is: Scifi writer: I have described the Torment Nexus as a warning. Do not build the Torment Nexus. Company: The Torment Nexus sounds like a great idea. We are just about to ship our MVP of the Torment Nexus!)

Coq unfortunately sounds like genitalia to an English audience, and there are tons of hang-ups (for good and dumb reasons) about referring to genitalia in polite company. It's very different level of cultural hang up than "silly euphemism for a fart". Also, for the record, it's a tool from a French team and named a French word that has nothing to do with the English genitalia word that it sounds like. (It is related to the English poultry homonym and why English even has such a homonym.) Not all programming needs to be Anglophilic or consult with English speakers first before naming all their tools.

Yes, there are loads of brand names that didn't work in other languages. Look up the car Toyota Fit / Jazz for example, that one was very nearly called something slightly different.

"I don't need X -> existence of X is a problem -> X should be removed" - this implication of yours seems a lil bit narcissistic to me.

they didn’t say “X should be removed”

did you respond to the wrong comment?

> It doesn't need to be mainstream, nor do I want to be mainstream.

Who t f are you? You seem the narcissistic here.