You people act like Bluesky is some insane echo chamber, and that it's bleeding users and down on the traffic front since the the election happened. That is a ridiculous notion, and I'll let BS's own Information Commissar Mike Misnack
take it from here:
For a supposedly dying bubble that no one wants to use, Bluesky sure generates a lot of traffic-driving hot takes. Which suggests that maybe—just maybe—the entire premise is wrong.
You see? The fact that people constantly rubberneck at this den of extremist retards means that, actually, it's a virile, open and healthy forum. Shun the naysayers!
Now, you might think that if everyone is complaining about “echo chambers” and “bubbles,” that there must be solid research showing that social media creates them. You would be wrong. The “echo chamber” critique of social media has been thoroughly debunked by researchers, who have consistently
found the opposite to be true: people not on social media live in more sheltered information environments than those who are.
Listen chuds. Researchers have proven that going outside, touching grass and talking to people is the real echo chamber, and that spending hours curating blocklists on some far-flung website that instantly bans anyone who thinks that the Holodomor happened just so you never encounter a heckin Internet Nazi is how you encounter a real diversity of opinions.
Do you doubt the science?
So the “bubble” critique is empirically wrong. But even if it were right, it misses the more important point: this isn’t really about ideological diversity. It’s about who controls the microphone. When critics argue that people should have stayed on ExTwitter to “engage across difference,” they’re ignoring a fundamental reality: Elon Musk controls the algorithm and actively throttles content he dislikes. The NY Times documented how Musk minimizes the reach of those expressing views he disagrees with.
Terrible. Horrible. Twitter, which was always a bastion of full and free expression before Musk took over, now practices anti-user measures like throttling and shadowbanning! I can't believe it. The old Twitter was never like this!
Most people aren’t looking for a debating arena. They want to talk with people they like about topics they care about—whether that’s knitting, local politics, or professional interests.
This becomes impossible when the platform owner has
hung out a shingle for Nazis, and your attempts to discuss your hobbies get drowned out by fascist propaganda algorithmically pushed into your timeline. That’s not “diverse discourse”—it’s just a bad user experience.
I don't know if this guy remembers internet forums, or usenet groups, or Facebook communities, but Twitter isn't exactly the place I've ever thought of when it comes to in-depth discussion of topics. And while I'd like to be sympathetic to his plight of encountering the occasional Trumper in the wild or seeing a thumbnail of a Ben Shapiro tweet, I'm constantly reminded of how even now I'll see shitty Breadtuber videos over and over again in my Youtube sidebar. However!
Any community—online or off—develops social norms. These cultural expectations show up as “we don’t do that here” or “we encourage this behavior” signals. Critics complaining about Bluesky’s norms are often just upset that those norms don’t align with their preferences. It’s a bit like complaining that different neighborhoods have different vibes.
Now, you may be thinking that this guy is a complete hypocrite, slagging off Twitter because of THE NAZIS while at the same time accusing anybody who makes of his gay, dead and homosexual site of having ulterior political motives. Rest assured you are wrong, and probably a Nazi. Don't yuck his yum!
But, also, part of the benefit of a system like Bluesky is that it puts users in much greater control over their own experience, meaning they can actually take charge themselves and craft better communities around them, rather than demanding that “the company” fix things.
Blocklists are the very bedrock of a free and fair society.
Finally, the entire premise is wrong. Anyone who actually spends time using Bluesky knows that it’s vibrant and active with a wide variety of discussion topics (and plenty of disagreements and debates, contrary to the whole “bubble” concept).
I lurk Bluesky to laugh at the retard spergs who populate it and concur it is vibrant and active. It is not as dead as Mastodon. Congratulations!!!
It’s also well aware of what’s happening elsewhere, as there are plenty of discussions about what viewpoints are happening on the wider internet.
Mike, baby. If this is true, please register an account here and respond to this post explaining how I'm wrong and a sexless incel chud. You won't get banned, you won't get throttled, and your post won't be edited. But you might get made fun of, laughed at, and - worst of all - receive some bad stickers. A bit different from our admin, who got banned the second he tried to make an account on your free and open commiecamp.
______________________________
I found this gay flailing passed off as an article hilarious because he's basically putting all the (correct) arguments for decentralization of the Internet forward (smaller, inclusive communities full of like-minded people with minimal conflict) but it's really all in service of one hyper-niche extremist site where all that is only truly AFTER anyone who doesn't spurt white thread to the thought of kulaks eating bullets are purged and gay space communist admins have the real final say on everything anyway.
Finally, just as a completely irrelevant aside, do YOU remember when all these tards migrated to Bluesky after the election and kept claiming (with "proof") that Twitter was going to die any day now? Because this dipshit and others like him sure as shit don't!
But that couldn't be, could it? 
