I am not criticizing them, I’m just out of the loop.

  • nodsocket@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    That’s a possibility. Since the platform started off on their terms, it’s harder to convince new people of opposing politics to join the community.

    • SoleInvictus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      A big part is because things like the Fediverse are aligned with the goal of Communists. Do away with the profit motive and constant rat race so we can spend time doing and making great things.

      Imagine if Facebook wasn’t interested in ad revenue and data gathering but truly sought to keep people connected and to facilitate communication. No bullshit algorithm, no manipulation to keep people doom scrolling.

      • ungoogleable@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        On a technical level, federation is arguably just as compatible with libertarianism. Each instance is its own island nation, free to set its own rules while members vote with their feet in free association. That it hasn’t gone that route is more to do with the founding population than the technology.

        • MaxVerstappen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Ya, the tech interests me. It feels like a version of the earlier internet where private forums and webrings were the norm. I like the native support for blocking things I don’t care to see as well.

    • NuPNuA@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Most of them seem to be centred around a few instances, they’re pretty easy to avoid once you have the lay of the land.