meta
Growing increasingly frustrated by people going "this is not how Mastodon was framed to me, it was described as a coherent Twitter alternative! I have been deceived!" while many of us have expended considerable effort to debunk that idea in the face of a tidal wave of lazy journalism spreading it further
meta
@joepie91 that feels like how Mastodon GmbH is trying to frame Mastodon though. I also think that’s what most people are looking for, and how it is different is always made clear in the replies to those people, but WHY it is different is not something I see communicated very clearly too often.
re: meta
@jonah The thing is, I'm unfortunately very familiar with this pattern from my earlier dealings in activism with 'leaderless collectives' of various kinds - even when there *isn't* someone from within the movement perpetuating this framing, there always will be a journalist looking for the 'centralized interpretation' that's easier to understand (but also wrong) and people *will* take that as a statement from the collective...
Journalists are a fucking scourge on leaderless things, frankly, they just *will not* take the time to correctly understand something before screaming it off the rooftops, almost categorically
re: meta
@jonah (Not that I don't have problems with Eugen, to be clear. But it's just not the entirety of the problem here)
re: meta
@joepie91 My point is that Mastodon isn’t really a “leaderless collective,” fediverse proponents just wish it was. It’s clearly structured to give Eugen the voice of the project as a whole by design IMO.
re: meta
@jonah This plays into the whole "people incorrectly believe that journalists are seekers of truth" thing, the exact same problem that also allows copaganda to run wild (eg. journos copy-pasting frequently-wrong claims from cops with zero fact-checking)