Bluesky - "Decentralized" Twitter Alternative. Leftist Tranny Hugbox. "Answer" to Elon Musk's "Fascist" Takeover of 𝕏 (Formerly Twitter).

Wired with a piece about how Bluesky sucks because nobody on there has a sense of humor.

Amy Brown was not screaming. She was not crying. She was not throwing up.
But on Bluesky she said that she was doing all three, simultaneously. Brown’s husband visited a Walgreens while he was on a business trip in Ohio in February. He told her the prices were cheaper than in California, where they live.

The price disparity led her to post that she was screaming, crying, and throwing up. Several Bluesky users responded to tell her she was exaggerating, and that nobody could possibly care that much. They were right. She didn’t. She was referencing one of the internet’s common sayings, one used so often that it’s the name of a Spotify compilation.

What Brown experienced is familiar to any former Twitter/X user gathering their bearings on the young and decidedly more earnest social network Bluesky: a distinct humor-detection issue. Some users are unable to decipher jokes, or they are deliberately trying to miss the point to make a different one. Many Bluesky users migrated over from X, where the top DOGE who did Nazi-like salutes on television is live-tweeting the destruction of American infrastructure. That’s a different and much more serious problem. Still, the seeming obliviousness-slash-self-seriousness of many Bluesky users is grating when you’re not used to it.


"They're speaking a completely different language than me,” Brown says. “We're both speaking English, but I'm speaking internet.”
Brown, a former social media manager for Wendy’s, joined Bluesky in 2023. Her X account was banned after she impersonated Elon Musk for almost two hours on November 4, 2022.

The “incident,” as she calls it, happened shortly after X announced paid verification. Brown changed her profile picture to one of a balding entrepreneur and edited her display name to “Elon Musk (real).” She convincingly emulated his voice, posting musings like “my wife left me lol” and “my penis is NOT weird.”

She didn’t know whether she’d be banned for her behavior on X, but she was OK with the possibility. “It's like, Elon's already the main character on this platform every day, and now he owns it. Do I really want to be here anymore?” she says.
While you can still find plenty of this kind of humor on Bluesky, there are a surprising number of people genuinely confused by it. There are several factors to blame here.

First is the clash between former users of X and Facebook. Anyone who logged their time on the Everything App is familiar with the language of Twitter: posts steeped in irony, in-group references, platform-specific history. When they left X, they brought all that wisecracking, insidery drollery with them. They even brought their pig-shitting-on-its-own-testicles JPEGs.

Meanwhile, former power users of Facebook, Instagram, and Threads are accustomed to their own barometers of funny. While Twitter felt like an intentional way to primarily interact with mostly strangers, and a familiar face might cause the user a moment of horror, Facebook was the opposite—at least initially, before it became Click FarmVille for engagement bait and advertisements for oddly specific custom novelty tees.

Bluesky also got a big boost in users from mainstream television: MSNBC ran multiple segments about the social network, including bumps on Morning Joe, The Weekend, All In With Chris Hayes, and The Rachel Maddow Show. Regular MSNBC viewers who took the plunge might not be as familiar with the tenor and style of online conversation on the smart-ass social web.

The lack of humor detection is made worse by tech: algorithmically curated content, à la Bluesky’s Discover feed, surfaces random posts to random people. A Maddow referral on Bluesky might see an ex-Twitter user’s vivid description of what they’d do to the Hamburglar if they saw him in person and react with genuine horror and confusion. It’s also PEBKAC issue—problem exists between keyboard and chair. You cannot force a person to understand a joke. The only action more futile is to get mad about it.

If these disparate groups have anything in common, it’s disgust with gigantic tech companies led by unpalatable CEOs, paired with a yearning to post in the lingua franca of their previously beloved platforms. Everyone’s brains are broken in different ways. I empathize with those who don’t get the joke. But I empathize more with the people trying to make them.

To paraphrase an Axios story from last year, America is in the midst of a gullibility crisis. People can’t tell what’s AI, a manipulated screenshot, a joke, or a lie. Many of us have opened up our relationship with reality. And the political climate has exacerbated the issue, according to Josh Gondelman, a comedian who previously worked as a producer and writer on Desus & Mero and wrote for Last Week Tonight With John Oliver.
“Since Trump’s run for the presidency, there has been a rapidly accelerating not-getting-jokes on the internet,” Gondelman says.
By Gondelman’s recollection, Bluesky hit a point where it was populated enough with active users to be both fun and useful at some point within the past six months. “But that also means it hit the tipping point where it’s populated enough to be annoying,” he says, laughing.
Mattie Lubchansky, an Ignatz Award–winning cartoonist, author, and illustrator, describes herself as “a primarily joke-posting kind of person.” The humor-detection issue of Bluesky is part of a broader phenomenon she has observed, which she calls “riff collapse.”

The day after the 2025 Oscars, Lubchansky posted: “i haven't seen any of the oscar movies this year, nor have i seen any movie ever made. i'm afraid that the people trapped inside the screen will be angry at me for not helping them escape; and once they are out i will be punished. anyway, here's how the awards validated an opinion i already had.”
The replies that followed were earnest opinions and arguments about Oscar-nominated films. Some people asked for movie recommendations. Some unironically recommended she check out The Purple Rose of Cairo. Only a handful of people seem to have understood that she was joking. Lubchansky says she sees this type of “riff collapse” happen daily, and she thinks it’s because of the influx of new users from Meta and X.

But the frustrations around new social platforms isn’t new. Networks will continue to pop up, ideally, and longtime users will continue to be annoyed by newbies.
In the early-to-mid-1990s, people often first accessed the internet when they arrived at college. Around September of every year, a bunch of new users would log on to their university’s network and start poking around the forums and discussion groups.
“The internet old timers would be very frustrated, because the new people didn’t know the social norms,” says technologist, writer, and former WIRED contributor Anil Dash. “Exactly the phenomenon we’re seeing right now.” September, for the most online netizens, was a dreaded time of the year. AOL opened the floodgates, allowing anyone to access the internet at any time. AOL’s bloom coincided with the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which deregulated the telco industry and brought internet connectivity to homes and institutions across the US.

This period was called the Eternal September, with “wave after wave of newbies getting online,” Dash says.
The pattern has repeated itself with LiveJournal and even Twitter. Actor and investor Ashton Kutcher appeared on CNN in 2009 and challenged the network to see whose account could hit 1 million Twitter followers first. (Kutcher won.) The stunt led to a rush of users flooding the microblogging platform.

Lubchansky thinks this moment presents an opportunity for people to examine their reply etiquette.
“Read the whole post before you respond. Take a moment to respond. And if you're going to respond with a joke, and we're not friends already, go look and see if somebody's made it already,” Lubchansky says. “Because there's a really good chance they have.”
Meanwhile, Brown considers the block function on Bluesky to be a favor to its recipient.
“If someone comes into my comments and they just really, really don't understand, usually I just block them so we don't run into each other again,” she says. “No hard feelings.” It’s a different approach than the norm on X, where quote-tweets viciously insulting the original post are part of the platform’s noxious fabric.

“I'm not trying to repeat the part of Twitter where the internet makes me mad every day,” Brown says.
Satirical site The Onion has the fifth largest Bluesky account, with over 1.2 million followers. Onion CEO Ben Collins doesn’t mind people replying to jokes in earnest. On the contrary, he says it’s “the funniest part of the internet.”
“It means more people are seeing your jokes,” he says. “If everyone is immediately breaking out into uproarious applause at your joke, your audience is too small.”
As someone who regularly used and posted on Twitter for years, I share the frustration when one of my jokey posts is misread or taken as fact. But it also strikes me as unfair to shame someone because they haven’t been slamming their head on the same wall of the internet that I have.
Not everyone crawled here from the radioactive sewer of X dot com. As we all get settled along with our new neighbors, it might be helpful to remember that. If not, at least Bluesky has very robust blocking features.

Amazing things happening in the comments, here's a sample:

View attachment 7196460

https://archive.ph/wip/q3dGn
https://www.wired.com/story/bluesky-cant-take-a-joke/
No, you ended up with Trump because you couldn't point out how godawful biden was as a president until it was too late to switch him out.
 
Porn addiction isn't real and actual the problem is being Christian: The Science has proven it:

View attachment 7212916
WARNING: the pornsick dude proudly writes rape porn (link SFW):

Jacking it to degenerate porn 10 times a day is the only way to stay safe from fascism:

View attachment 7212928
ADHD and epression are not a winning combo.
By the by, is that not just a rehash of Sigmund's insistence that neuroses are due to suppressing your erotic desire... even thoug his findings are considered obsolete by modern psychology... and that Sigmund claimed that babies wer erotic by birth?
On another point, I am actually surprised that someone from BlueSky is actually criticising th 'Everybody I Don't Like is Hitler' ideology that BlueSky has.

If it weren't for the evil influence of Christianity modern society would be benefiting from the sexual wisdom of Islamists, pedophiles and Islamist pedophiles:

View attachment 7212932
That is actually a bit of a reach.
They would extend that hatred to all Abrahamic religions. Notice tha they are glorifying cultures that are not from the Middl East.

This is what a fully integrated, propagandized rube looks like:

View attachment 7212943
View attachment 7212956
View attachment 7212958
That might explain the pornsickness. Dashwallkick has parental conflict.


All of the above reminds me of thi Skeet:
soldierexclipse said:
purity politics
1744570377378.webp
Honestly, I find nothing wrong wi the situation there and am confused on the point.
 
Last edited:
I'm seeing this metaphor used a lot and I still don't get it. Are they that desperate to think that those "ebil MAGAts" are suffering to feel better about their own miserable lives?
View attachment 7218391
It's just a way to try to dance on the grave of someone they dislike. This particular Skeeter looks like they're having a brief moment of realization that not its not about feeling they want things to change, it's just momentary schadenfreude.
 
It's weird that the Troons arguing that there's nothing wrong with jacking it 25 times a day don't get that it's not the act of masturbation that's an issue for most people. Jerk off, sure, watch porn even, I don't think most people care. It's when it affects your ability to hold a job, a relationship, a normal sleep schedule, friends, hobbies - when porn and whacking it become ALL that these Troons do, it's not a moral issue, it's a practical one.

They focus on "oooh you hate sex and masturbation because you're morally repressed." No. Most people aren't like that. We are just able to see that gooning over and over every day to increasingly degenerate porn is a pretty sad waste of our one frickin life.

Consuming tons of porn to the exclusion of getting a goddamn life - THAT is the issue. Unless these guys are actually arguing that cumming is all that matters. In which case yeah, I feel like we might be in addiction territory, buds. That sounds like addict talk.
 
It's weird that the Troons arguing that there's nothing wrong with jacking it 25 times a day don't get that it's not the act of masturbation t
If you did that unironically your dick would become unusable. Troons don't get it because they don't have a real one anymore.
 
If you did that unironically your dick would become unusable. Troons don't get it because they don't have a real one anymore.
This is a problem that gooners and trannies (but I repeat myself) actually will face. They beat their dick so viciously that they numb it to all but the most intense sensation. If you constantly bombard yourself with porn the brain gets the same way, it's why they'll always seek something more extreme.

Then eventually they'll go to the ultimate extreme that they can manage at the time and mutilate their body.
 
I'm seeing this metaphor used a lot and I still don't get it. Are they that desperate to think that those "ebil MAGAts" are suffering to feel better about their own miserable lives?
View attachment 7218391
The original tweet (on X) said something along the lines of 'People would vote for the "Leopards Eat Your Face Party" and go "I never thought that leopards would eat MY face!"' That is a metaphor of people voting towards people who espouse certain views or policies then those same people being surprised a the politician performing those views or policies on the voters. One xample would be a legislation voting to act against regulation that acted against global warming then suddenly finding their courtroom floode due to melting ice caps.

The problem is the 'Leopards Eating Your Face Party' metaphor applying very easily to Donald Trump's policies if you view the world under a woke lens. After al, Latinos for Trump will find themselves or their family deported and immigration halted. The woke refuse to acknowledge that Donald will deport illegal immigrants, ome who are actually members of criminal gangs, while the pause of immigration was necessary because of the chaotic state of immigration in general back then. Even the 'accidental case' was a deliberate lie: https://www.americanthinker.com/blo..._shipped_back_to_el_salvador_falls_apart.html

Woke reasoning involves either thinking that every Latino is here 'illegally' or the law is actually a cover of getting rid of al Latinos.

A bigger problem is the narcissism involved wi that meme, which is always done from a woke perspective. If African Americans vote towards more police, they will endure lots of 'Leopards Eat Your Face' accusations because the woke will never stop thinking tha the police are inherently racist against African Americans. The meme is never done wi the intention of wanting to help minorities or other people tha the woke claim to love; the meme is always used in 'pwning' their opponents.
 
Last edited:
Weird, I can't quote @theultimateramotith's post.

I'm familiar with the metaphor. What I don't understand is that the people using the analogy are so deluded as to think there are actual political options. Democrats have been shitting on minorities for decades and they don't want them to be prosperous. They want them to be indentured to the democratic party. The metaphor works both ways. You could cite every example of democrats failing their voter base and say "leopards ate your face!" It's dumb and overly reductive.

But your insight about the woke lens makes sense. They don't care about truth or helping people. They only care about tearing people down.
 
I found this site to be pretty useful: https://bsky.jazco.dev/stats
1744720899426.webp

1744720966194.webp

You can see Bluesky is declining. Either all of the people are going back to twitter where they have a much bigger audience and there's more content, or they're being chased off by the crazy echo chamber.

This site is also handy: https://clearsky.app/
Bluesky blocks are public. It's fascinating to see how often people use blocks as performative gestures. They're not doing it because they encountered content they didn't like. These collections of mental neurosis actively seek out profiles to visit for the express purpose of blocking and even share links with their buddies to get their buddies to block them too. Twitter's algorithm heavily penalized people based on how many blocks they've accrued and that's exactly why twitter was cancer. The Twitter algorithm was being manipulated by people like this. They still do it on bluesky but with no algorithm it's purely performative.
 
Anyone notice the trannies and commies that stayed behind on other social networks stopped their “I won’t post here, see the rest on bluesky” schitck. I saw a lot of people grandstanding and now I haven’t seen a single one in a month. There seemed to be a coordinated movement to label every other site as a Nazi, and to try to migrate people over. But now, they just post normally and occasionally link a bkuesky post that gets zero traction as people aren’t signing up for yet another social media account
 
Back