A feud on Twitter highlights the perils of engaging on the platform and a growing tension among researchers and medical professionals.
A feud on Twitter highlights the perils of engaging on the platform and a growing tension among researchers and medical professionals.
Anybody know where they’re going? I’ve seen some in mastodon, some in substack, some just on linkedin…but other than rss there is no easy way to follow a larger crowd of posters from different sources.
It’s all kind of new so nobody knows where the large majority will land until the dust settles. Probably another year or so. But Substack and Mastodon seem to be the most common from what I’ve seen.
Wikipedia is also making social platform too, called WT Social. It’s not federated unfortunately, but maybe that makes it easier to moderate
https://wt.social/
Edit: The beta is here
https://wts2.wt.social
Why do I get a bad feeling about it? I hope wikipedia remains the same after that.
Besides… they ask so desperately for donations, so it makes me wonder if the project can be sustainable.
Maybe I’m overthinking stuff, let’s see how it goes.
on Twitter jimmy said that after they sort out their main focus which is some “trust based algorithm” system that I don’t really understand, they will add activitypub and all sorts of ways to make it more interconnected.
Yeah, the trust based algo is how they operate wikipedia. Basically it rates users on their edits and accuracy, Ina very slow and time consuming manner for the mods. But it means that users get “trust ranks” for their contributions and have more power based on their rank.
Used on a social media platform will be an interesting experiment, especially if it gets federated. Could be good or bad
You may want to link to the beta because they’re directing people there instead and accounts made for the original site don’t work for it. wts2.wt.social
Ah true, thanks