cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/57576884

There's so many ways to interact with the Fediverse. The most popular, by far, seems to be Mastodon, but Lemmy, Misskey, and Pixelfed are also relatively popular. Kbin used to be popular, but it has apparently been abandoned, and is mostly dead at this point.

I recently learned that Mbin is a thing, checked it out, and it looked really cool! Has anyone used it? How different is it from Lemmy? I hear they have better integration with Mastodon.

What Fediverse services do you actually, regularly use?

For me, it's mostly Lemmy, though I do hop on Mastodon every now and then.

cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/57576884

There's so many ways to interact with the Fediverse. The most popular, by far, seems to be Mastodon, but Lemmy, Misskey, and Pixelfed are also relatively popular. Kbin used to be popular, but it has apparently been abandoned, and is mostly dead at this point.

I recently learned that Mbin is a thing, checked it out, and it looked really cool! Has anyone used it? How different is it from Lemmy? I hear they have better integration with Mastodon.

What Fediverse services do you actually, regularly use?

For me, it's mostly Lemmy, though I do hop on Mastodon every now and then.

cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/57380534

The Warriors have been doing really well since the Jimmy trade. They're 9-2. That's very, very good.

Here's the thing: in that stretch of games, they faced exactly 0 (zero) actual contenders. By actual contenders, I mean OKC, the Nuggets, Boston, and Cleveland. The closest things to a contender they faced were the Mavs, the Knicks, and the Bucks, but the Bucks didn't have Giannis, they went 1-1 against the Mavs without AD and they're cooked regardless, and well the Knicks were actually good and got blown out. That is to say, I'm unconvinced.

You see people talking about how Steph's been unleashed by Jimmy, which might be fair

he has been playing really well, regardless of whether that can be attributed to Jimmy or not

but misses the point, at least in part. Has he been playing well against fuckass OKC? Because, quite frankly, if they can't beat Shai, it doesn't matter. It just doesn't matter.

Steph needs another ring, Jimmy needs a ring. Anything outside of a championship is a failure for this season. Time is running out, and I just don't see this team performing at a high enough level to get there. I say this with a pained chest, of course, but they just aren't good enough.

I know, I know, shocker. Nobody's really walking around saying that the Warriors have a shot at the big-one, so it's not like I'm providing revolutionary analysis here, but it does frustrate me to watch this.

---

I'd also like to talk about NBA nicknames. I've always thought nicknames are one of the coolest aspect of NBA fandom; the joker, king James, chef Curry... These are iconic. They make watching the games that much more fun. Recently, the NBA has underwent a bit of a nickname renaissance, so to speak, seemingly on the back of "The Anomaly," referring to Jayson Tatum. It's not a bad nickname, as far as nicknames go, but it doesn't fit at all. It's a brilliant example of undeserved glazing, if anything. However, people have taken it in stride and started developing nicknames for other, sometimes mostly irrelevant NBA players.

My favourite ones so far are "The Trolley Problem" for Santi Aldama, and "The Ad Hominem Fallacy" for Jalen Green. I've tried looking it up, but I have no idea why Jalen got stuck with that, which makes it even funnier. They're so ridiculous, like Santi's, but mostly they're comprehensible. The idea is that Aldama presents a moral dilemma to the defender. Not bad, not bad... But I think that the sheer absurdity of a nickname as incomprehensible, nigh undecipherable, as Jalen Green's pushes it over the top of great into legendary status.

I saw a comment on a TikTok where the nickname "The Butcher" for Draymond Green was advanced. It pointed out how the Warriors have a chef, a butcher, and a butler. That's just perfect.

cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/56619187

More than meets the eye, again and again.

At first, things seem quiet and unremarkable. A cliché premise, cliché developments, cliché characters... Actually, things didn't seem quiet and unremarkable at all; Re:Zero seemed boring and uninteresting. More of that ever-pouring slop Japanese webnovels insist on becoming, more of that persistent stench of mediocrity and the unbridled numbness of barren creativity.

Re:Zero is just more of the same old, same old.

At first...

But, at first, even the normal is strange. Even as we're born, we cry. We're confused, lost, terrified as the world that we now take for granted assaults our senses and wrecks our mind and body alike. Voices endless, smells, feelings, all of it is so much---too much! What makes life beautiful aren't the large pieces that we all have in common, but the small distinctions that make us unique. One would assume death is the same, of course.

All one can do is assume death is the same. That is, of course, except for Natsuki Subaru.

Re:Zero throws us into the typical isekai fantasy world---it even tricks us for a bit!---but pretty soon we understand that that's not the case at all. Natsuki Subaru doesn't die. Or rather, he dies and is then reborn. He gets to try again. That's what Re:Zero is about.

What if you could try again? What if your biggest failures were erased and you had a do-over?

As a premise, this is brilliant. It's not the first time I've read a time-travel story with a somewhat similar outline---shout-out to Mother of Learning---but Re:Zero is unique enough from within what I've read to trigger that novelty factor.

The cast is extensive and varied, including several of the traditional isekai tropes while continuously subverting them in some of the most creative ways possible. Even Subaru himself, the MC, is a subversion of the typical isekai MC. He reminds me of Kazuma from KonoSuba, actually, at first.

That's always the point, isn't it? At first, at first, at first... There's always more than meets the eye.

If that was all that Re:Zero was, it would be enough to make for a good story. However, Subaru is faced with the flip-side of his condition: he loses all the good parts too. The pain, the suffering, the despair that dripped from the pages when he loses everything was at times so overwhelming I actually had to take a breather. It's like the Witch's miasma bled through the screen and seeped into my eyes---that's the only reason I cried, of course...

What if you had to choose? What if you could try again, but even then you failed?

The ever-growing pressure of his mistakes digs into your heart and crushes your very soul, I'm telling you. Seeing him come to terms with how much he's lost and watching him gather the courage to keep going... It's beyond fantastic.

My biggest gripes with the novel are the following:

• The translation is mediocre and littered with errors;
• Subaru does too much talk no jutsu.

Still, it's not a big deal. I'm used to reading webnovels, so reading a poor translation isn't a significant problem; I just expected more. Subaru's incessant yapping can get frustrating at times, but I can rationalize it by saying that, well, if he dies, he can just try something else. When it works, it's hard to say that that wasn't the best option so... I can't really complain... I just don't like it that much. Let it be known, though, Re:Zero isn't just Subaru's yapsesh; he very much works! He tries, and fails, and tries, and fails, and he tries again. He tries everything he can think of. What I love most, perhaps, is that he doesn't get random power-ups like you see in other series. He gets stronger by failing and learning. He improves slowly by trial and error. It's really satisfying to see him figure things out!

The world is getting more and more complex by the volume, by the chapter, by the page really. By Volume 15, it felt like the world had grown ten-fold, both geographically and lore-wise. It's so complex and enticing with so many mysteries to dive into. I can't wait to learn more.

I mentioned the extensive cast already, but there's really no reason not to bring it up again. There isn't a single character I dislike in this whole thing. There are characters that are very much despicable, yes, but there aren't any of those cliché "bad because they're bad" or "good no matter what" characters. Every character is either extremely complex, with believable and deeply emotional motivations, or simply not developed enough to tell just yet. After all, there's so many characters but only so many pages to talk about them. I don't think that's to the detriment of the narrative in the slightest, though.

Really, the only character I actually have sincere gripes with is Subaru himself! Specifically in regards to his choice of heroine. He's wrong, and I'll stand by that. He's the only character in the whole series whose motivation I question. You'd think this would be a big deal, but it really isn't. He's an idiot, an irredeemable moron. That's what makes his story so compelling: we get to see an irredeemable moron turn into a somewhat redeemable moron, little by little, life by life, death by death.

Is this the greatest masterpiece of the 21st century? The century isn't over just yet, but it's in the running; I'll tell you that much.

What do you think?

---

Rating: 5/5

Read on Witch Cult Translations!
Disclaimer: I read the Light Novel version of Re:Zero, not the WCT webnovel translation.

cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/56619187

More than meets the eye, again and again.

At first, things seem quiet and unremarkable. A cliché premise, cliché developments, cliché characters... Actually, things didn't seem quiet and unremarkable at all; Re:Zero seemed boring and uninteresting. More of that ever-pouring slop Japanese webnovels insist on becoming, more of that persistent stench of mediocrity and the unbridled numbness of barren creativity.

Re:Zero is just more of the same old, same old.

At first...

But, at first, even the normal is strange. Even as we're born, we cry. We're confused, lost, terrified as the world that we now take for granted assaults our senses and wrecks our mind and body alike. Voices endless, smells, feelings, all of it is so much---too much! What makes life beautiful aren't the large pieces that we all have in common, but the small distinctions that make us unique. One would assume death is the same, of course.

All one can do is assume death is the same. That is, of course, except for Natsuki Subaru.

Re:Zero throws us into the typical isekai fantasy world---it even tricks us for a bit!---but pretty soon we understand that that's not the case at all. Natsuki Subaru doesn't die. Or rather, he dies and is then reborn. He gets to try again. That's what Re:Zero is about.

What if you could try again? What if your biggest failures were erased and you had a do-over?

As a premise, this is brilliant. It's not the first time I've read a time-travel story with a somewhat similar outline---shout-out to Mother of Learning---but Re:Zero is unique enough from within what I've read to trigger that novelty factor.

The cast is extensive and varied, including several of the traditional isekai tropes while continuously subverting them in some of the most creative ways possible. Even Subaru himself, the MC, is a subversion of the typical isekai MC. He reminds me of Kazuma from KonoSuba, actually, at first.

That's always the point, isn't it? At first, at first, at first... There's always more than meets the eye.

If that was all that Re:Zero was, it would be enough to make for a good story. However, Subaru is faced with the flip-side of his condition: he loses all the good parts too. The pain, the suffering, the despair that dripped from the pages when he loses everything was at times so overwhelming I actually had to take a breather. It's like the Witch's miasma bled through the screen and seeped into my eyes---that's the only reason I cried, of course...

What if you had to choose? What if you could try again, but even then you failed?

The ever-growing pressure of his mistakes digs into your heart and crushes your very soul, I'm telling you. Seeing him come to terms with how much he's lost and watching him gather the courage to keep going... It's beyond fantastic.

My biggest gripes with the novel are the following:

• The translation is mediocre and littered with errors;
• Subaru does too much talk no jutsu.

Still, it's not a big deal. I'm used to reading webnovels, so reading a poor translation isn't a significant problem; I just expected more. Subaru's incessant yapping can get frustrating at times, but I can rationalize it by saying that, well, if he dies, he can just try something else. When it works, it's hard to say that that wasn't the best option so... I can't really complain... I just don't like it that much. Let it be known, though, Re:Zero isn't just Subaru's yapsesh; he very much works! He tries, and fails, and tries, and fails, and he tries again. He tries everything he can think of. What I love most, perhaps, is that he doesn't get random power-ups like you see in other series. He gets stronger by failing and learning. He improves slowly by trial and error. It's really satisfying to see him figure things out!

The world is getting more and more complex by the volume, by the chapter, by the page really. By Volume 15, it felt like the world had grown ten-fold, both geographically and lore-wise. It's so complex and enticing with so many mysteries to dive into. I can't wait to learn more.

I mentioned the extensive cast already, but there's really no reason not to bring it up again. There isn't a single character I dislike in this whole thing. There are characters that are very much despicable, yes, but there aren't any of those cliché "bad because they're bad" or "good no matter what" characters. Every character is either extremely complex, with believable and deeply emotional motivations, or simply not developed enough to tell just yet. After all, there's so many characters but only so many pages to talk about them. I don't think that's to the detriment of the narrative in the slightest, though.

Really, the only character I actually have sincere gripes with is Subaru himself! Specifically in regards to his choice of heroine. He's wrong, and I'll stand by that. He's the only character in the whole series whose motivation I question. You'd think this would be a big deal, but it really isn't. He's an idiot, an irredeemable moron. That's what makes his story so compelling: we get to see an irredeemable moron turn into a somewhat redeemable moron, little by little, life by life, death by death.

Is this the greatest masterpiece of the 21st century? The century isn't over just yet, but it's in the running; I'll tell you that much.

What do you think?

---

Rating: 5/5

Read on Witch Cult Translations!
Disclaimer: I read the Light Novel version of Re:Zero, not the WCT webnovel translation.

cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/56496251

I'd like to add to suggest a couple of things regarding Mastodon and user onboarding/retention.

The Server Selection Problem^TM^

The single biggest problem with Mastodon adoption is the fact people see talk about a server and give up. As such, servers need to be removed from the conversation and onboarding process. A server still needs to be selected for a new user, however, which raises the question: How should we select a server for a new user?

The obvious solution is to simply direct users to mastodon.social, which is actually what Mastodon already does to a certain extent. The issue with this is that the Fediverse is meant to be decentralized. As such, it's counterproductive to funnel people towards a single server. This causes maintenance bottlenecks and privacy/data-protection concerns.

As such, there needs to be some sort of method that ranks servers based on a few factors in order to select the optimal server for any given user, while keeping the decentralized nature of the Fediverse in mind.

Why any server?

First, it's important to answer the question of why would any given user pick any given server.

Generally speaking, the server isn't a big deal, as in, any server allows users to interact with the whole of the network in its full capacity.

All servers are Mastodon, after all.

However, there are differences. The most significant ones are, I'd say: location, uptime, and language.

A user benefits from being registered to a server that's geographically close to them, as that leads to a better connection. Additionally, servers with high uptime and stability are preferred, as users may have different times they use the server and nobody likes to try and access a server and see that it's down for any number of reasons. Finally, users need to be able to understand the language the server is in (obviously).

I believe these three factors should be at the forefront of the decision-making process for deciding what server to be suggested to any given user on sign-up.

Auto-selector

With that, comes the solution: a server auto-selector. A game I play, DCSS, actually does something similar for online play.

(I have my location turned off and there are very few servers, as you can see, so listing them is trivial.)

This isn't exactly a novel scientific breakthrough, but I think it's a significant notion for helping the onboarding process for new Mastodon users.

A server auto-selector should filter servers to suggest by following these steps:

• Detect the user's system language.
• Detect the user's location.
• Calculate the server's uptime score.
• Pseudo-rank user-count.

I believe the first two points are self-explanatory. Being that Mastodon (and the Fediverse, in general) stands firmly against data-harvesting, location data should probably not be mandatorily collected. It should be easy to either ask the user for some vague information or simply allow them to skip this step entirely, even if it might affect the user experience. Additionally, there's the issue that many servers don't make it known where they're hosted. Ideally, this could change to facilitate server selection for the users, but there's always the point that, if a server doesn't say where it's hosted, it gets pulled down by the algorithm, which in turn encourages divulging that kind of information; this might a problem solved by the solution, if you get my meaning.

What I mean by uptime score is simply an evaluation of the server's uptime history. For example, it's not good policy to direct users towards servers that are often unavailable, it might be disadvantageous to direct users to servers with too-frequent downtime for maintenance, and so on. As such, the server auto-selector should calculate a sort of "score" for any server that fits the first two points. I can't say how this should be calculated, exactly, but I'm sure some computer-knowers out there can come up with a less-than-terrible methodology for this.

The last point is something that I think should be taken into account as well, regarding the user-count of the servers. As I mentioned, we can't funnel users towards a single server, but another issue is that we should actually encourage user dispersion over many servers. The outlined method might already do this to a sufficient extent, but I suggest doing some sort of randomization of filtered servers based on user-count. I think it's wrong to simply plug a new user into the least-populated server around, but I do think that over-populated servers, in a relative sense, should be discouraged by the server-selector.

Worst case scenario, a random server that passes the uptime score point can be selected for any new user.

The onboarding experience

Basically, this should be as simple as possible. The more questions need to be answered, the worse.

I think a simple "Join Mastodon" button is the best. Just a big blue button in the middle of the homepage.

Server selection should start as soon as the new user accesses the joinmastodon website, and clicking the button simply redirects the user to the sign-up process for that server.

I believe this approach would increase adoption of Mastodon by streamlining the server selection process, as well as help the continuous decentralization of the Fediverse.

The Feed Problem

Another significant issue with Mastodon is the feed and community/discovery aspects.

Creating a new Mastodon account yields... Nothing. An empty feed!

This is absolutely terrible and ruins user retention. I've had several people tell me that this first-experience emptiness completely turned them off from Mastodon. It's not intuitive, and it needs to be corrected.

A simple solution

Mastodon does have feeds, but they're all tucked away in the Explore and Live Feeds tabs.

I think the single biggest change that Mastodon can make, as far as this goes, is to shift the Explore->Posts feed to the Home tab. Just do it like Twitter or Bluesky, make the discovery feed the first thing a new user encounters.

That, by itself, should make a difference in terms of user retention.

---

Maybe I'm delusional and severely underestimating how doable this is, but I really believe Mastodon needs to change the way it deals with new users if we want it to actually grow into a strong social media, keyword social (it needs people).

Thoughts?

cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/56496251

I'd like to add to suggest a couple of things regarding Mastodon and user onboarding/retention.

The Server Selection Problem^TM^

The single biggest problem with Mastodon adoption is the fact people see talk about a server and give up. As such, servers need to be removed from the conversation and onboarding process. A server still needs to be selected for a new user, however, which raises the question: How should we select a server for a new user?

The obvious solution is to simply direct users to mastodon.social, which is actually what Mastodon already does to a certain extent. The issue with this is that the Fediverse is meant to be decentralized. As such, it's counterproductive to funnel people towards a single server. This causes maintenance bottlenecks and privacy/data-protection concerns.

As such, there needs to be some sort of method that ranks servers based on a few factors in order to select the optimal server for any given user, while keeping the decentralized nature of the Fediverse in mind.

Why any server?

First, it's important to answer the question of why would any given user pick any given server.

Generally speaking, the server isn't a big deal, as in, any server allows users to interact with the whole of the network in its full capacity.

All servers are Mastodon, after all.

However, there are differences. The most significant ones are, I'd say: location, uptime, and language.

A user benefits from being registered to a server that's geographically close to them, as that leads to a better connection. Additionally, servers with high uptime and stability are preferred, as users may have different times they use the server and nobody likes to try and access a server and see that it's down for any number of reasons. Finally, users need to be able to understand the language the server is in (obviously).

I believe these three factors should be at the forefront of the decision-making process for deciding what server to be suggested to any given user on sign-up.

Auto-selector

With that, comes the solution: a server auto-selector. A game I play, DCSS, actually does something similar for online play.

(I have my location turned off and there are very few servers, as you can see, so listing them is trivial.)

This isn't exactly a novel scientific breakthrough, but I think it's a significant notion for helping the onboarding process for new Mastodon users.

A server auto-selector should filter servers to suggest by following these steps:

• Detect the user's system language.
• Detect the user's location.
• Calculate the server's uptime score.
• Pseudo-rank user-count.

I believe the first two points are self-explanatory. Being that Mastodon (and the Fediverse, in general) stands firmly against data-harvesting, location data should probably not be mandatorily collected. It should be easy to either ask the user for some vague information or simply allow them to skip this step entirely, even if it might affect the user experience. Additionally, there's the issue that many servers don't make it known where they're hosted. Ideally, this could change to facilitate server selection for the users, but there's always the point that, if a server doesn't say where it's hosted, it gets pulled down by the algorithm, which in turn encourages divulging that kind of information; this might a problem solved by the solution, if you get my meaning.

What I mean by uptime score is simply an evaluation of the server's uptime history. For example, it's not good policy to direct users towards servers that are often unavailable, it might be disadvantageous to direct users to servers with too-frequent downtime for maintenance, and so on. As such, the server auto-selector should calculate a sort of "score" for any server that fits the first two points. I can't say how this should be calculated, exactly, but I'm sure some computer-knowers out there can come up with a less-than-terrible methodology for this.

The last point is something that I think should be taken into account as well, regarding the user-count of the servers. As I mentioned, we can't funnel users towards a single server, but another issue is that we should actually encourage user dispersion over many servers. The outlined method might already do this to a sufficient extent, but I suggest doing some sort of randomization of filtered servers based on user-count. I think it's wrong to simply plug a new user into the least-populated server around, but I do think that over-populated servers, in a relative sense, should be discouraged by the server-selector.

Worst case scenario, a random server that passes the uptime score point can be selected for any new user.

The onboarding experience

Basically, this should be as simple as possible. The more questions need to be answered, the worse.

I think a simple "Join Mastodon" button is the best. Just a big blue button in the middle of the homepage.

Server selection should start as soon as the new user accesses the joinmastodon website, and clicking the button simply redirects the user to the sign-up process for that server.

I believe this approach would increase adoption of Mastodon by streamlining the server selection process, as well as help the continuous decentralization of the Fediverse.

The Feed Problem

Another significant issue with Mastodon is the feed and community/discovery aspects.

Creating a new Mastodon account yields... Nothing. An empty feed!

This is absolutely terrible and ruins user retention. I've had several people tell me that this first-experience emptiness completely turned them off from Mastodon. It's not intuitive, and it needs to be corrected.

A simple solution

Mastodon does have feeds, but they're all tucked away in the Explore and Live Feeds tabs.

I think the single biggest change that Mastodon can make, as far as this goes, is to shift the Explore->Posts feed to the Home tab. Just do it like Twitter or Bluesky, make the discovery feed the first thing a new user encounters.

That, by itself, should make a difference in terms of user retention.

---

Maybe I'm delusional and severely underestimating how doable this is, but I really believe Mastodon needs to change the way it deals with new users if we want it to actually grow into a strong social media, keyword social (it needs people).

Thoughts?

I'd like to add to suggest a couple of things regarding Mastodon and user onboarding/retention.

The Server Selection Problem^TM^

The single biggest problem with Mastodon adoption is the fact people see talk about a server and give up. As such, servers need to be removed from the conversation and onboarding process. A server still needs to be selected for a new user, however, which raises the question: How should we select a server for a new user?

The obvious solution is to simply direct users to mastodon.social, which is actually what Mastodon already does to a certain extent. The issue with this is that the Fediverse is meant to be decentralized. As such, it's counterproductive to funnel people towards a single server. This causes maintenance bottlenecks and privacy/data-protection concerns.

As such, there needs to be some sort of method that ranks servers based on a few factors in order to select the optimal server for any given user, while keeping the decentralized nature of the Fediverse in mind.

Why any server?

First, it's important to answer the question of why would any given user pick any given server.

Generally speaking, the server isn't a big deal, as in, any server allows users to interact with the whole of the network in its full capacity.

All servers are Mastodon, after all.

However, there are differences. The most significant ones are, I'd say: location, uptime, and language.

A user benefits from being registered to a server that's geographically close to them, as that leads to a better connection. Additionally, servers with high uptime and stability are preferred, as users may have different times they use the server and nobody likes to try and access a server and see that it's down for any number of reasons. Finally, users need to be able to understand the language the server is in (obviously).

I believe these three factors should be at the forefront of the decision-making process for deciding what server to be suggested to any given user on sign-up.

Auto-selector

With that, comes the solution: a server auto-selector. A game I play, DCSS, actually does something similar for online play.

(I have my location turned off and there are very few servers, as you can see, so listing them is trivial.)

This isn't exactly a novel scientific breakthrough, but I think it's a significant notion for helping the onboarding process for new Mastodon users.

A server auto-selector should filter servers to suggest by following these steps:

• Detect the user's system language.
• Detect the user's location.
• Calculate the server's uptime score.
• Pseudo-rank user-count.

I believe the first two points are self-explanatory. Being that Mastodon (and the Fediverse, in general) stands firmly against data-harvesting, location data should probably not be mandatorily collected. It should be easy to either ask the user for some vague information or simply allow them to skip this step entirely, even if it might affect the user experience. Additionally, there's the issue that many servers don't make it known where they're hosted. Ideally, this could change to facilitate server selection for the users, but there's always the point that, if a server doesn't say where it's hosted, it gets pulled down by the algorithm, which in turn encourages divulging that kind of information; this might a problem solved by the solution, if you get my meaning.

What I mean by uptime score is simply an evaluation of the server's uptime history. For example, it's not good policy to direct users towards servers that are often unavailable, it might be disadvantageous to direct users to servers with too-frequent downtime for maintenance, and so on. As such, the server auto-selector should calculate a sort of "score" for any server that fits the first two points. I can't say how this should be calculated, exactly, but I'm sure some computer-knowers out there can come up with a less-than-terrible methodology for this.

The last point is something that I think should be taken into account as well, regarding the user-count of the servers. As I mentioned, we can't funnel users towards a single server, but another issue is that we should actually encourage user dispersion over many servers. The outlined method might already do this to a sufficient extent, but I suggest doing some sort of randomization of filtered servers based on user-count. I think it's wrong to simply plug a new user into the least-populated server around, but I do think that over-populated servers, in a relative sense, should be discouraged by the server-selector.

Worst case scenario, a random server that passes the uptime score point can be selected for any new user.

The onboarding experience

Basically, this should be as simple as possible. The more questions need to be answered, the worse.

I think a simple "Join Mastodon" button is the best. Just a big blue button in the middle of the homepage.

Server selection should start as soon as the new user accesses the joinmastodon website, and clicking the button simply redirects the user to the sign-up process for that server.

I believe this approach would increase adoption of Mastodon by streamlining the server selection process, as well as help the continuous decentralization of the Fediverse.

The Feed Problem

Another significant issue with Mastodon is the feed and community/discovery aspects.

Creating a new Mastodon account yields... Nothing. An empty feed!

This is absolutely terrible and ruins user retention. I've had several people tell me that this first-experience emptiness completely turned them off from Mastodon. It's not intuitive, and it needs to be corrected.

A simple solution

Mastodon does have feeds, but they're all tucked away in the Explore and Live Feeds tabs.

I think the single biggest change that Mastodon can make, as far as this goes, is to shift the Explore->Posts feed to the Home tab. Just do it like Twitter or Bluesky, make the discovery feed the first thing a new user encounters.

That, by itself, should make a difference in terms of user retention.

Maybe I'm delusional and severely underestimating how doable this is, but I really believe Mastodon needs to change the way it deals with new users if we want it to actually grow into a strong social media, keyword social (it needs people).

Thoughts?

Recently, I've been really watching the YT videos of a certain Rajiv Surendra and feeling somewhat conflicted. (Love the videos by the way, recommend)

I'm a minimalist, by all accounts; I don't buy things I don't need and I only buy what I need and when I need it. I do have a hard time throwing things away (I'm working on it) but, generally speaking, I live a very minimal, intentional life of few but meaningful possessions.

Rajiv, though, isn't like that. He does so many things: candlemaking, soapmaking, he plays music, he's a caligrapher, videographer, writer, public speaker... He's amazing, he's incredible, really. His apartment is relatively small, but it's so full of things. Yet, I can't help but feel he follows a philosophy very similar to my own. He mentions stuff like "only add it if it serves a function" when talking about gift-wrapping and I'm just taken aback by the dichotomy of owning a bunch of gift-wrapping stuff---a thousand rolls of yarn and string---but following a minimalist wrapping philosophy.

I guess the point of this post is to ask a bit of an open-ended question.

Why are you a minimalist and what could make you change?

I'm a minimalist because I hate waste and clutter. I don't like having a bunch of stuff I don't need and I don't like buying disposable things, it bothers me. Thing is, when I see Rajiv write beautiful letters I can't help but wish I had someone to write letters to. I wish my room was filled with paper and bottled ink. I just feel that, despite going against what's really at the core of how I live my life, I could accept it regardless.

Sorry if I'm not making any sense, but I'm curious what you guys think.

xoxo

I found out about her after her feature on Denzel. I'd heard some of her songs before randomly but never got curious enough to look her up until her verse on HOT ONE.

Her music sounds a bit samey IMO, but her talent is undeniable; she's got flow, lyrics, and charisma. Also... She's newgen, no denying that.

I strongly dislike the majority of mainstream fem rappers out right now (Cardi B, Megan, Sexxy Red) but I think Tia has some gems.

Thoughts?

Give No Fuck

I found out about her after her feature on Denzel. I'd heard some of her songs before randomly but never got curious enough to look her up until her verse on HOT ONE.

Her music sounds a bit samey IMO, but her talent is undeniable; she's got flow, lyrics, and charisma. Also... She's newgen, no denying that.

I strongly dislike the majority of mainstream fem rappers out right now (Cardi B, Megan, Sexxy Red) but I think Tia has some gems.

Thoughts?

Give No Fuck