Think about things from the point of view of someone who has never used Reddit or the fediverse, but you’ve heard about them both from recent news articles and want to see what they are about.

Reddit:- You Google Reddit and your first result is Reddit.com. You click the link and are presented with the front page. You from scroll from a few hours and end up signing up and staying.

Lemmy:- You Google Lemmy and your first result is a wiki article for Lemmy Kilmister… Your second result might be join-lemmy.org, which you’re smart enough to realise it’s probably more likely what the news is about.

You click join-lemmy.org and are presented with a page of information about the fediverse, links to set up a server and pictures of code…

There is very little chance you’re going to investigate further.

If we want the fediverse to replace Reddit then either
A) Lemmy needs to improve its initial impression and Search engine optimization
B) We should be promoting a different platform with a better initial first impression.

I’d recommend kbin personally as it gives the same sort of experience as Reddit from the initial interaction.

  • JamesGray@kbin.social
    25·
    1 year ago

    Nonetheless, here’s a viewpoint I have that I know is not accepted, but I’ll share it anyway. I believe the compulsion of speech, particularly insisting that all of society adapt their language to accommodate individual identities, is a terrible approach. The notion of forced speech is problematic to me, and worries me greatly.

    Is this the fucking Jordan Peterson position? Whose speech has been compelled? A man walked into a Philosophy of Gender class this week in Canada and stabbed three people, so sorry if I’m a lot more concerned with the constant hate speech being levied against LGBTQ+ people than I am with the anomalous concept of “compelled speech” which has not as of yet been an issue and only exists in the fever dream of transphobes who want to actively misgender people while working in public positions in Canada.

    • nanoobot@kbin.social
      2·
      1 year ago

      I agree with you, but this is a really bad counterargument to what they said. Even widely agreed politeness conventions to a degree ‘compel’ speech, so the debate is really around what speech is acceptable for society to encourage/suppress, rather than whether cultural changes are changing what people are compelled to say. Also, I don’t think they said anything that suggested they are more concerned by that than hateful violence?