(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
    15·
    2 years ago

    Discouraging Clout Chasing Behaviors:
    Promoting Content Quality and Relevance:

    I see your goal here, but how would this actually work? Like what buttons does the user see?

    Are we all still collectively deciding what counts as valuable contributions? If so, this sounds veryyy similar to what we already have using either upvotes or boosts lol.

    • “Agreement” sounds like an upvote. I like this content.
    • “Mark as quality” sounds like a boost. More people should see this.

    So what metric(s) do you actually want implemented?

    alternative ways to measure influence and impact (insightful comments, fostering discussions, valuable contributions).

    If those are the buttons you think we should have, I don’t think the internet can be objective enough to make these reliably more useful than an upvote.

    If I see buttons saying “Insightful / Fosters Discussion / Valuable”, I’m mostly going to just hit any or all of them when I like the content. And I’ll click none of them when I dislike content, 'cause duh that’s not insightful or valuable!

    So what should we actually do to achieve these noble goals?

    Engagement, interactions, relevance, and authenticity

    Ehh, sorting by interactions can encourage excess commenting or spamming near content you want promoted. More interactions doesn’t necessarily mean higher quality. I’m commenting several times on this post, but it could have been one commentary for the exact same content. Should this thread’s quality be treated differently based on my format?

    Unfortunately, engagement is highest around controversial topics, which again doesn’t necessarily indicate the highest quality content.

    I’m pretty sure sorting by relevance is how YouTube & TikTok try to serve you content, but I don’t think we should aspire to black box algorithms.

    Agh, I swear I’m not trying to just shoot down all your ideas. I’m trusting based on your writing that you’re open to collective constructive criticism. You’re obviously thinking here, thinking more than most people do lol.

    It’s just that this is a very complex issue, that will need very nuanced solutions. Humans have spent a heck of a lot of time, money and effort trying to figure about it, and we still seem to get it wrong a lot haha.

    • Unhappily_Coerced@kbin.socialOP
      3·
      1 year ago

      what buttons does the user see?

      Voting options could still exist, the point is that the metrics are hidden (when it’s something as simple as Up or Down). You wouldn’t see how many people agree or disagree with a post or the content the’ve decided to post. Discouraging the countless accounts who repost the same memes to the same communities multiples times per week.

      I’m mostly going to just hit any or all of them when I like the content. And I’ll click none of them when I dislike content

      Ideally, there would be multiple options (engaging, comprehensive, shitpost, etc) but a user would only be allowed to select one, and wouldn’t be able to submit it without reaching a specific character limit explaining their position. Albeit, some would just fill the character limit with emojis, no doubt. In turn, the hope is that the community would call out such behaviors because, admittedly…

      I don’t think the internet can be objective enough to make these reliably more useful than an upvote

      …I might be naive and have more faith in people…

      Should this thread’s quality be treated differently based on my format?

      The simplest answer is that it would be unlikely that a single user would be able to heavily influence that metric. More heavily weighing the amount of the engaged users.

      but I don’t think we should aspire to black box algorithms

      I most assuredly agree. “Security through obscurity” has never been the correct answer. That’s why we have open discussions, so more than just a few people can find the vulnerabilities. ;)

      I’m trusting based on your writing that you’re open to collective constructive criticism.

      That’s exactly why I’m here. I’ve never enjoyed most social media platforms, so when I heard people were migrating, I had to check it out. Come to find out, all these alternate, open platforms are just recreating the same disaster. Taking the, in my opinion, worst aspects of social platforms and trying to justify their continued usage…

      Humans have spent a heck of a lot of time, money and effort trying to figure about it, and we still seem to get it wrong a lot haha.

      Name one time when money has created something better than that which was created by a heartfelt, open source, community (don’t actually LOL).

      Again, I appreciate your input. It’s why I’m here, to talk to people who actually care and want something better. How can we say we’re moving forward and progressing when we’re actually just revolving?