We need to protect the protocol that runs Bluesky

Re:We need to protect the protocol that runs Bluesky by seydor on Sunday January 19, 2025 @02:23PM (#42760667)

At this point in history it's wrong to suggest that any mass communication medium can be non-politicized

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:We need to protect the protocol that runs Bluesky by poszlem on Sunday January 19, 2025 @02:57PM (#42761104)

And using BlueSky as an example of a "non-politicized" platform is even more inaccurate.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:We need to protect the protocol that runs Bluesky by hb-robo on Wednesday January 22, 2025 @09:59AM (#42793506)

It's politicized by default when it stands in opposition to the most blatantly ideologically slanted social media site in existence this side of Gab and Truth Social.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:We need to protect the protocol that runs Bluesky by threeseed on Sunday January 19, 2025 @05:43PM (#42762835)

You can. Threads achieved this for a while before Zuckerberg capitulated.

All you need to do is down-rank political content in general and prevent it from appearing in For You type feeds.

Then it just becomes a case of people needing to specifically follow political content which heavily limits its reach.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:We need to protect the protocol that runs Bluesky by rexpop on Sunday January 19, 2025 @11:08PM (#42764890)

Down-ranking "political content" requires a definition of "politics" which is, inherently, an ideological posture, QED all content that remains is "political content."

It's an oxymoron.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:We need to protect the protocol that runs Bluesky by threeseed on Monday January 20, 2025 @06:10AM (#42767439)

Like I said Threads did this and it was effective.

So much so all the journalists left for BlueSky and they have had to reverse it.

[ Parent | on HN ]