It’s fascinating to me that where a variety of reactions to a post exist — like Like, Heart, Fire, Dislike etc — these reactions are all about emotions.

Johannes Ernst

It’s fascinating to me that where a variety of reactions to a post exist — like Like, Heart, Fire, Dislike etc — these reactions are all about emotions. None of them are about facts.

For example, what if I could express “I believe this to be true” or “…to be false”? Or “I agree with this statement” vs “disagree”? Or “I have first hand evidence supporting this”.

It’s almost as if social media was created as an emotional rage machine, rather than something that supports fact finding.

Andy Piper

@j12t ENGAGEMENT

bip

@j12t

It's a distractor for sad people.

Then there's about 5% of us who are trying to use it to communicate and spread useful information.

The rest are just compensating for sad lives.

Johannes Ernst

@andypiper I take the bait! For those businesses optimizing for shareholder value by means of showing ads and thus trying to boost emotional engagement, that makes a lot of sense!

But what about those projects -- like most in the Fediverse -- whose success is not measured that way? Couldn't we do better, de-emphasize the emotion and add more support for collaborative fact finding?

Johannes Ernst

@bipartisan Nothing wrong in my book if only 5% of people were to use it. It would be useful to them!

naturzukunft

@j12t Hi johannes, karte von morgen has come up with something that goes in that direction. but there is indeed still a lot of potential.

Nachhaltigkeitsbewertung durch Positivfaktoren | Karte von morgen

(www.kartevonmorgen.org)

@Kartevonmorgen

Andy Piper

@j12t we can always do better!

{Insert Pasta Pun}

@j12t I have plans >:3