> False. Or rather, you characterize Twitter engagement in one way, and ignore all the other ways. I, for example, enjoy engaging with smart, good people from around the world.
You don't need Twitter to do that. Arguably, it was easier to engage with the smart, good people from around the world on IRC since it wasn't through the guise of microblogging 240 characters at one another in public. I think it's perfectly fine to characterize Twitter by it's lowest common denominator.
> The key is to a) be careful about who you follow, and b) give 0 care about likes, retweets, etc.
Sounds like it's a fundamentally broken system then, no? If it's incentivizing toxic engagement and behavior patterns, that's an issue.
> Twitter is not really one place, it's a huge network of places, a bit like Reddit, and so behavior and content varies significantly.
No, it is "one place". There are federated networks similar to Twitter like Mastodon and Pleroma where that is the case, but Twitter is one homogenous userbase, for better or worse. You're lumped in with the left-wing pundits, the right-wing trolls and everyone in between.
Generally speaking, this comment kinda makes me sad. Nobody needs to take the bullet for Twitter, of all places. It's notoriously shitty by-and-large, and while some people have gotten it to work for them (more power to you), trying to claim it's a universally altruistic platform if you ignore the bad stuff is simply disingenuous.
You are not communicating in good faith, changing my words and their meanings, in an effort to promote your dogmatic view. Ironically it is this, not the platform, that is the root of the problems that seem to bother you. Good day!
You don't need Twitter to do that. Arguably, it was easier to engage with the smart, good people from around the world on IRC since it wasn't through the guise of microblogging 240 characters at one another in public. I think it's perfectly fine to characterize Twitter by it's lowest common denominator.
> The key is to a) be careful about who you follow, and b) give 0 care about likes, retweets, etc.
Sounds like it's a fundamentally broken system then, no? If it's incentivizing toxic engagement and behavior patterns, that's an issue.
> Twitter is not really one place, it's a huge network of places, a bit like Reddit, and so behavior and content varies significantly.
No, it is "one place". There are federated networks similar to Twitter like Mastodon and Pleroma where that is the case, but Twitter is one homogenous userbase, for better or worse. You're lumped in with the left-wing pundits, the right-wing trolls and everyone in between.
Generally speaking, this comment kinda makes me sad. Nobody needs to take the bullet for Twitter, of all places. It's notoriously shitty by-and-large, and while some people have gotten it to work for them (more power to you), trying to claim it's a universally altruistic platform if you ignore the bad stuff is simply disingenuous.