Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse

NodeBB

  1. Home
  2. uncategorized
  3. Man, the Wikipedia article on the Fediverse is really kinda shit.

Man, the Wikipedia article on the Fediverse is really kinda shit.

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved uncategorized
28 Posts 10 Posters 21 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • owiecc@en.osm.townO owiecc@en.osm.town

    @catraxx The "send do mastodon.social" was done especially because a lot of people were turned away. Good move IMO, but when the developer making @PixelFed did something similar there was a big community pushback.

    Going back to what you wrote about the Wikipedia article, it should be expanded. The first sentence from adoption section cites sources from 2022. Many of the issues raised were addressed already.

    catraxx@tech.lgbtC This user is from outside of this forum
    catraxx@tech.lgbtC This user is from outside of this forum
    catraxx@tech.lgbt
    wrote last edited by
    #19

    @owiecc I do believe the wording has to be entirely different. It has a very negative tone, when at best it should be neutral.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • catraxx@tech.lgbtC catraxx@tech.lgbt

      Man, the Wikipedia article on the Fediverse is really kinda shit.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fediverse

      So many half truths. Also:

      "Users have been slow to embrace the Fediverse due to poor user experience and excessive complexity."

      Excessive complexity?! You write a message and click post ... what? Is choosing a server difficult or something? I don't get it.

      Excessive complexity. This is literally the hardest thing ever. Like if you want easy stuff, go work at CERN, that's where we send all the people who fail at posting here, it's the literal losers club. :neocat_what:

      chad006@mastodon.socialC This user is from outside of this forum
      chad006@mastodon.socialC This user is from outside of this forum
      chad006@mastodon.social
      wrote last edited by
      #20

      @catraxx i think it's choosing a server, i didn't knew hubzilla existed until today and it's older than mastodon.
      Also it's a lot easier to gain followers and follow interesting people on bluesky and other platfomrs than on here. But that's MY opinion. I have very little followers. To speak to no one I'll keep a diary.

      catraxx@tech.lgbtC 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • chad006@mastodon.socialC chad006@mastodon.social

        @catraxx i think it's choosing a server, i didn't knew hubzilla existed until today and it's older than mastodon.
        Also it's a lot easier to gain followers and follow interesting people on bluesky and other platfomrs than on here. But that's MY opinion. I have very little followers. To speak to no one I'll keep a diary.

        catraxx@tech.lgbtC This user is from outside of this forum
        catraxx@tech.lgbtC This user is from outside of this forum
        catraxx@tech.lgbt
        wrote last edited by
        #21

        @chad006 Would you rate this as "Excessively complex", though, or wouldn't you agree that this article is being overly negative?

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • catraxx@tech.lgbtC catraxx@tech.lgbt

          @owiecc If you know that you can choose a server, you already know more than the average user, who searches for "mastodon" and is promptly send to mastodon.social.

          And annoying =/= "Excessively complex".

          At best the wording should be that there are technical differences in how the fediverse works, which can be irritating to some.

          Excessively complex is doing your taxes or reading a trade agreement. It is not registering and posting in the fediverse.

          philbetts@mastodon.socialP This user is from outside of this forum
          philbetts@mastodon.socialP This user is from outside of this forum
          philbetts@mastodon.social
          wrote last edited by
          #22

          @catraxx @owiecc there's also the "why am I logged into Mastodon but when I go to like, boost or reply to a post from a link it's asking me to log in or go back to my server?"

          Because you've landed on a different server hosting the same Mastodon software, skinned, branded, and styled *identically*. But it's not the same. It's a different instance with no awareness of your account.

          That's not an easy concept to grasp for a casual user, and the interface, while better, is still not that helpful

          philbetts@mastodon.socialP 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • philbetts@mastodon.socialP philbetts@mastodon.social

            @catraxx @owiecc there's also the "why am I logged into Mastodon but when I go to like, boost or reply to a post from a link it's asking me to log in or go back to my server?"

            Because you've landed on a different server hosting the same Mastodon software, skinned, branded, and styled *identically*. But it's not the same. It's a different instance with no awareness of your account.

            That's not an easy concept to grasp for a casual user, and the interface, while better, is still not that helpful

            philbetts@mastodon.socialP This user is from outside of this forum
            philbetts@mastodon.socialP This user is from outside of this forum
            philbetts@mastodon.social
            wrote last edited by
            #23

            @catraxx @owiecc sure we can quibble over "excessive", but comparatively there's a lot of things hostile to casual users. Some of them are by design and unavoidable. Some have been or are being addressed. Some can be mitigated further.

            catraxx@tech.lgbtC 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • philbetts@mastodon.socialP philbetts@mastodon.social

              @catraxx @owiecc sure we can quibble over "excessive", but comparatively there's a lot of things hostile to casual users. Some of them are by design and unavoidable. Some have been or are being addressed. Some can be mitigated further.

              catraxx@tech.lgbtC This user is from outside of this forum
              catraxx@tech.lgbtC This user is from outside of this forum
              catraxx@tech.lgbt
              wrote last edited by
              #24

              @philbetts @owiecc Yes, we can quibble over that word and many others. It does not change the fact this article is written in an incredibly negative overall way when it should be neutral. These are small annoyances, should we sum them up in the same way for everything? because i can find negatives in everything if i am trying.

              owiecc@en.osm.townO 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • catraxx@tech.lgbtC catraxx@tech.lgbt

                @philbetts @owiecc Yes, we can quibble over that word and many others. It does not change the fact this article is written in an incredibly negative overall way when it should be neutral. These are small annoyances, should we sum them up in the same way for everything? because i can find negatives in everything if i am trying.

                owiecc@en.osm.townO This user is from outside of this forum
                owiecc@en.osm.townO This user is from outside of this forum
                owiecc@en.osm.town
                wrote last edited by
                #25

                @catraxx @philbetts Remember that wikipedia is not an opinion site. It is a tertiary source. It should reflect the cited secondary sources.

                If secondary sources from 2022 say the UX is bad then wikipedia article should reflect that. Here we can argue whether “excessively” correctly summarises the two articles.

                If you'd like to update the article, look for all the sources that mention Fediverse UX, then cite and summarise them. If the sources mention UX is getting better then you can add that.

                catraxx@tech.lgbtC 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • owiecc@en.osm.townO owiecc@en.osm.town

                  @catraxx @philbetts Remember that wikipedia is not an opinion site. It is a tertiary source. It should reflect the cited secondary sources.

                  If secondary sources from 2022 say the UX is bad then wikipedia article should reflect that. Here we can argue whether “excessively” correctly summarises the two articles.

                  If you'd like to update the article, look for all the sources that mention Fediverse UX, then cite and summarise them. If the sources mention UX is getting better then you can add that.

                  catraxx@tech.lgbtC This user is from outside of this forum
                  catraxx@tech.lgbtC This user is from outside of this forum
                  catraxx@tech.lgbt
                  wrote last edited by catraxx@tech.lgbt
                  #26

                  @owiecc @philbetts Ok, but the cited sources are just opinion pieces, not studies. I can cite as many opinion pieces as i want. That's a silly game to play. There is no objective way to judge this and therefore this is all editorializing and should not be in the article to begin with.

                  Like, i am a frontend expert, i could just write an article and praise it to the moon, it is just as credible as anything else. Do i have numbers to reflect this? No. Do they? No.

                  The fediverse is growing, so i am right? Maybe, maybe that has nothing to do with UX at all? Who knows.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • catraxx@tech.lgbtC catraxx@tech.lgbt

                    Man, the Wikipedia article on the Fediverse is really kinda shit.

                    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fediverse

                    So many half truths. Also:

                    "Users have been slow to embrace the Fediverse due to poor user experience and excessive complexity."

                    Excessive complexity?! You write a message and click post ... what? Is choosing a server difficult or something? I don't get it.

                    Excessive complexity. This is literally the hardest thing ever. Like if you want easy stuff, go work at CERN, that's where we send all the people who fail at posting here, it's the literal losers club. :neocat_what:

                    fandermir@mastodon.socialF This user is from outside of this forum
                    fandermir@mastodon.socialF This user is from outside of this forum
                    fandermir@mastodon.social
                    wrote last edited by
                    #27

                    @catraxx To be honest, I was at first a bit confused as I understood that there are multiple instances wirh different rules and I was worried I would not find any people on those smaller servers with more tech oriented topics, and I would not find tech stuff on a larger server.
                    I still struggle a bit to follow accounts on other servers, and I still do not know (but did not check either) how to connect to lemmy or other fediverse platforms. Do I need an account there or can I use my account here?

                    catraxx@tech.lgbtC 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • fandermir@mastodon.socialF fandermir@mastodon.social

                      @catraxx To be honest, I was at first a bit confused as I understood that there are multiple instances wirh different rules and I was worried I would not find any people on those smaller servers with more tech oriented topics, and I would not find tech stuff on a larger server.
                      I still struggle a bit to follow accounts on other servers, and I still do not know (but did not check either) how to connect to lemmy or other fediverse platforms. Do I need an account there or can I use my account here?

                      catraxx@tech.lgbtC This user is from outside of this forum
                      catraxx@tech.lgbtC This user is from outside of this forum
                      catraxx@tech.lgbt
                      wrote last edited by
                      #28

                      @fandermir Does not seem to matter much in day to day operation. I don't know what's going on with lemmy, and i never checked. But i am sure the answer wouldn't be too hard to find?

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      Reply
                      • Reply as topic
                      Log in to reply
                      • Oldest to Newest
                      • Newest to Oldest
                      • Most Votes


                      • Login

                      • Login or register to search.
                      Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                      • First post
                        Last post
                      0
                      • Categories
                      • Recent
                      • Tags
                      • Popular
                      • World
                      • Users
                      • Groups