(Please keep in mind this is something I’ve written in regards to all of these various social platforms, not just kbin, mastodon, lemmy, etc)

Albeit, other platforms have failed their user base for various reasons. This article isn’t about that. This is about addressing other issues that encourage low effort or otherwise useless content. The vast landscape of social media platforms, there is a growing need to reevaluate and refine the user experience (UX) to address common issues that hinder genuine interaction and content discovery. By examining the shortcomings of existing practices and proposing innovative changes, we can create a more engaging and meaningful online environment.

Hiding Voting Metrics:
Voting metrics inadvertently lead to conformity and discourage users from expressing genuine opinions. Users should feel more comfortable sharing their thoughts and perspectives without fear of judgment or backlash.

Removing Emoji-Based Reactions:
The current practice of using emoji reactions as a means of interaction lacks depth and context. These reactions do not provide any insight into why a user liked, disliked, or loved a post… This change would promote more genuine interaction and create a space for nuanced conversations.

Discouraging Clout Chasing Behaviors:
Platforms can implement measures that limit the emphasis on popularity metrics. Introduce alternative ways to measure influence and impact (insightful comments, fostering discussions, valuable contributions). By shifting the focus from superficial metrics to meaningful engagement, platforms can create an environment that encourages authentic participation.

Promoting Content Quality and Relevance:
Hiding voting metrics and mitigating clout chasing behaviors allows platforms to prioritize quality and relevance. Engagement, interactions, relevance, and authenticity is used to determine the visibility of content. This approach ensures that valuable and meaningful content receives recognition, while reducing the emphasis on arbitrary popularity metrics.

Recognizing the Limitations of Memes:
While memes can be entertaining and lighthearted, they often lack the depth. Memes, while humorous, rarely foster in-depth discussions or promote the exchange of diverse perspectives. By highlighting the limitations of relying on meme-based content, platforms can encourage users to move beyond superficial engagement and embrace more substantive interactions.

This approach optimizes content organization by utilizing horizontal space before continuing vertically. This method ensures that users can browse through a larger number of posts allowing users to quickly scan and explore popular posts while maintaining a clear overview of the content available. Reorganizing the UX of platforms by adopting a mass display approach for content organization brings numerous benefits. It optimizes content visibility, promotes content diversity, and streamlines content organization. By presenting the most interacted-with content side-by-side (instead of most popular on top) and utilizing horizontal space effectively, platforms create a dynamic and engaging user experience.

This reimagined platform design enhances content discoverability, improves user engagement, and fosters a thriving online community that values quality and relevance.

There are tons of other aspects of this to discuss but I won’t bother diving into them (how new and unpopular posts receive recognition, front page content dying off due to less interaction based on time decay, etc etc)

  • shepherd@kbin.social
    4·
    1 year ago

    Hmm, I think I understand your goals here, but I don’t fully understand their implementation. I’m gonna reply in sections because you deserve nuanced response!

    Hiding Voting Metrics:

    Okay, so I participated in a similar discussion about removing downvotes recently.

    Right off the bat, one of the key concerns here is that the technology we’re using makes all voting public as a baseline. You can opt to close your own eyes (hide them for yourself or for your instance), but other people or instances will still see the votes because ActivityPub transfers information as “users acting upon other content.”

    So unfortunately this may be a hard feature to shift without fediverse-wide agreement (or fediverse splintering).

    Anyways, I have some concerns about the actual goal here, because we can’t actually prevent all fear of judgement or backlash. Anytime you say anything, someone can disagree with you by text comment, which can be very strong disagreement while staying within normal moderation limits.

    But! I can see that mitigating the effects of voting may reduce the punishments for participating outside narrow echo-chambers, and that seems important. Even if I don’t think this is the correct solution, it is a worthwhile discussion!

    I propose making downvotes have no effect on reputation. It’s okay to know people disagree with you. We just reduce the extent a downvote harms users. I’m even willing to make upvotes have no effect on reputation either, to address some of your later concerns.

    This would let people casually agree/disagree with comments as we all seem to like doing. Rather than committing to a full comment when I don’t have a meaningful contribution, a little upvote feels like the correct way to say “Nice!” vs no response and letting the author think they aren’t being seen. But benign voting would be for just that specific content with no further ramifications lol.

    I do find vote counts have benefits for me, letting me feel the pulse of community response, and I’m idealistic about finding a healthy medium!

    • Unhappily_Coerced@kbin.socialOP
      1·
      1 year ago

      I’m by no means asking for immediate action or implementation. just attempting to provoke discussion and thought into the topic. I both understand and appreciate what is already happening here and the level of effort it would take to redesign and roll out global changes.

      we can’t actually prevent all fear of judgement or backlash

      Of course not, it would be foolish to think otherwise. This is the internet, hatred and controversy will always exist. However, you can lead a horse to water…

      which can be very strong disagreement while staying within normal moderation limits.

      In my mind, this is the preferred interaction. Users should always be able to see all perspectives within a discussion. It makes one think more about the content they are consuming, offers more context for the lurkers, and it’s very simple for any user to block or hide any other user from future interactions (if that’s what they feel is needed).

      I propose making downvotes have no effect on reputation.

      I didn’t address my perspective regarding rep or karma, but I should have. This goes back to my previous point and another topic I didn’t touch on, moderation. I agree with both proposals. A better system for troll-free magazines or online spaces MIGHT be as simple as looking at how many users have blocked a specific account. Though, it’s likely to be more nuanced than this considering how passionate some people are certain issues.

      a little upvote feels like the correct way to say “Nice!” vs no response and letting the author think they aren’t being seen.

      I was never much of a social media user, however, I think one thing that reddit did right was the awards. Unfortunately, the moderators likely didn’t see any of that income (something to keep in mind considering the budding state of alt social platforms). Point being, I think something like that is much more rewarding than an upvote, while a conversation outweighs both.

      vote counts have benefits for me, letting me feel the pulse of community response, and I’m idealistic about finding a healthy medium!

      I’d argue that it isn’t healthy at all. But this circles back to the clout chasing argument. I think healthy discussion is going to give a user more than an arrow can ever give, while also promoting critical thinking and the development of more substantial connections among users and the community.

      Thank your for taking the time.

      • shepherd@kbin.social
        1·
        1 year ago

        Huh, okay! I’m mostly nodding along in agreement here.

        I was never much of a social media user, however, I think one thing that reddit did right was the awards. Unfortunately, the moderators likely didn’t see any of that income (something to keep in mind considering the budding state of alt social platforms). Point being, I think something like that is much more rewarding than an upvote, while a conversation outweighs both.

        Interesting, that’s unexpected! I’m surprised because I see huge piles of reddit awards as pretty comparable to huge blocks of discord emoji reactions, and you said you don’t want the emojis lol. Do you just like that actual money was committed, or what’s going on here?

        I think we should very cautiously approach how we handle money and transactions affect anything around here, so… strong hesitation lol.

        I’d argue that it isn’t healthy at all. But this circles back to the clout chasing argument. I think healthy discussion is going to give a user more than an arrow can ever give, while also promoting critical thinking and the development of more substantial connections among users and the community.

        Huh. Okay, well. My initial reaction is confusion, but I’m willing to review my beliefs lol.

        So of course, healthy discussion is incredibly valuable and positive. But what if I don’t really have anything meaningful to say?

        For example, imagine I see a thread where someone has refinished their bench (probably in a woodworking or DIY kind of magazine). Let’s say I arrive late to the thread too, so plenty of people have already asked all the interesting questions like techniques, what products were used, origins of the bench etc. So usually this is where I’d just upvote lol.

        I don’t want to pass by with no interaction, so… I guess I’ll pick random small talk so they know I like it? “Neat! Can’t wait to see your next project!” or something?

        So instead of 25 high quality comments and 60 upvotes, that thread likely ends with 50 comments of which half really just say “Nice!” (+ an unknown amount of upvotes). I suppose it’s nicer to hear the specific words of encouragement, but it is certainly much more effort and likely a poorer noise:signal in the comments lol.