Bluesky is not a social network or a product or a service, it is fundamentally a promise - a promise that you can decide — with others in your social geography — where you want to be in the digital world, and you don’t have to lose all of the bits that represent you in the process.

Bluesky is the only mainstream social media platform on the planet where an independent individual can permissionlessly create their own custom algorithmic feed, host it on their own equipment, and have it be responsible for 4% of the entire network’s post views

"As a Bluesky user, you own your data and have greater control over the algorithms that serve you content. Also, the platform is extremely publisher friendly and aims to ... be a quality partner to high-quality news sources." Love to hear it, @sf.gazetteer.co sf.gazetteer.co/reflections-on-a-year-of-gaze…

i think, end of the day, the real problem with Bluesky is that most of its users are here *because* they want to be in a bubble. and they can tell themselves that it’s just about not being around Nazis it supporting Musk, and that’s part of it, but also there’s a palpable desire to be ensconced.

Bluesky should go back to invites, continue aggressive bot bans, create a Craigslist-style marketplace (since you’re more likely to buy/get services from a educated or good person on here than any other social network), and market this place like a walled garden protected from enshittification.

This is a really insightful thread that points out some of the fundamental issues with the Bluesky community vs Bluesky as a decentralized protocol. This thread is also why I think it's a really smart move for Bluesky to appeal to fandoms... (cont.)

There's a pernicious belief, widely believed, that if a platform isn't on its way to becoming the biggest platform then it's on its way to failing. That belief is silly. So let's stop talking about Bluesky as if that belief is true.