My Problems with Mastodon
Even with growing pains accommodating an influx of new users, Lemmy has made it clear that a federated social media site can be nearly as good as the original thing. I joined Lemmy, and it exceeded my expectations for a Reddit alternative run by an independent team.
These expectations were originally pretty low when Mastodon, the popular federated Twitter alternative, was the only federated social media I had experience with. After using Lemmy, Mastodon seems to be missing basic features. I initially believed these were just shortcomings of federated social media.
-
Likes aren’t counted by users outside your instance, and replies don’t seem to be counted at all (beyond 0, 1, 1+), leading to posts that look like they have way more boosts (retweets) than likes or replies:
This incentivizes people to just gravitate toward the biggest instance more than people already do. My guess is that self-hosting a mastodon instance would also not be ideal, since the only likes you’ll see are your own.
-
There’s really only one effective ways to find popular or ‘trending’ posts. There’s the explore tab which has ‘posts’, and ‘tags’ sections.
The ‘posts’ section shows some trending posts across your instance and all the instances that it’s federated with, this is the one I use it the most.
The ‘tags’ section is a lot like the trending tab on Twitter, but it’s reserved just for hashtags, which I guess isn’t a huge deal, but it feels like a downgrade. However, I do like the trend line it shows next to each tag!
The ‘Local’ and ‘Federated’ tabs are a live feed of post from your home instance and all the other instances, respectively. I feel these are pretty useless and definitely don’t warrant their own tabs. Having a local trending tab for seeing popular posts on your instance would be more interesting.
-
The search bar basically doesn’t work, is this just me???
-
This one is more minor and more specific to a Twitter alternative, but when looking at a user’s follows, you’ll only see the one’s on your home instance but for some reason this rule doesn’t apply to followers.
From what I’ve heard, a lot of these issues are intentional in order to create a healthier social media experience. Things like less focus on likes, reduces a hivemind mentality, addiction, things like that (I couldn’t find a source for this, if anyone has one confirming or disproving this please lmk).
Why this is a Problem
Mastodon seems to have two goals: To be an example of how a federated alternative to Twitter can work well, and to be a healthier social media experience. It’s not obvious, but I think these goals conflict with each other. A lot of the features that are removed in the pursuit of a healthier social media will be perceived as the shortcomings of federation as a concept.
In my eyes, Mastodon’s one main goal should be proving federated social media as a whole to the public, by being a seamless, familiar, full-featured alternative to Twitter. For me, Lemmy has done that for Reddit, upvotes are counted normally, you can see trending posts locally and globally same with communities, and the search function works! All its shortcomings aren’t design flaws, and I fully expect them to be fixed down the road as it matures.
As annoying as Jack Dorsey is, I have high hopes for BlueSky.
You must log in or register to comment.
This post was at the top of Mastodon’s explore page yesterday: https://mas.to/@kissane/110793942888550843
I feel it perfectly encapsulates the issues I see others and I face with Mastodon. Since it was #1 trending, it probably resonated with many more too.
The technical issues can eventually solved. The cultural ones? That’s the big question.
Lemmy seems far more approachable. It has its issues, but at least it has a working search.
Watching Mastodon-stans defend the lack of search is like watching a cult-member explain an insane belief.
So far, Lemmy feels like the least cultish corner of the fediverse. That might be due t it’s external focus.
Calckey/Firefish (forked from the Japanese software Misskey, so I assume that one is similar) is basically Mastodon but cool. It fixes many of your problems. While it’s not yet perfect (same issue with followers from other servers), there seems to be more going on.
As annoying as Jack Dorsey is, I have high hopes for BlueSky.
As long as he doesn’t submit that protocol as ActivityPub 2.0 or whatever, it’s not compatible with the wider fediverse, so not interesting.
I only found firefish the other day but 'like Mastodon but cool" is a perfect way to describe it.
As long as he doesn’t submit that protocol as ActivityPub 2.0 or whatever, it’s not compatible with the wider fediverse, so not interesting.
If they get their act together and publish a real protocol / standard that a developer can read, implement, and then have a server capable of federating, then activitypub 1.0 can diaf and we can all praise our new activitypub 2.0 overlords.
I’d be surprised if he did submit it as activitypub, he’s already called it ATProtocol
He cannot just call something the name of an industry standard but he can submit his to the W3C who then can decide whether to adopt it or not
Mastodon doesn’t have Likes at all.
The star you’re referring to is Favorite. Those go into your Favorite list. So you can refer back to them more easily.
Oh god, Ive been using them wrong this whole time?!?!
I guess I am so used to other social media I had assumed it was a like button.
[This comment has been deleted by an automated system]
Although they differ from Twitter Likes, note that Mastodon Favorites are not private. For an example, I’ll refer to one of your toots:
https://mastodon.social/@justhach/110696151311920356Viewing it in the Mastodon web interface, I see an indication that 2 people marked it as a Favorite. I can then click to see those 2 usernames, listed here:
https://mastodon.social/@justhach/110696151311920356/favouritesSuch listings are limited though. For example, I’m viewing a toot that you boosted, and I see an indication that it has been marked as a Favorite by 816 users; but when I click to view their names, I see only 40 of them listed.
[This comment has been deleted by an automated system]
No, you haven’t. It started out this way, but now basically it’s the “tell the poster you acknowledge/like the post” but also there when you don’t want to boost the post to your timeline. You can still use it this way, but because the community (probably with one of the first twitter exoduses) started using it more like a like on twitter, they gave up and implemented bookmarks (I think might be private and not notify the poster you’ve bookmarked?)
Ofc, there are also some of the mastodon HOA that will still insist this, but then why do bookmarks exist…?
Anyway, just in general, you can tell by the up/down ratio and a lot of the comments that are getting upvoted in this thread that are posting things that are either just incorrect or at least misunderstand things how many people in this thread actually use mastodon, so I would take criticism with a grain of salt.
I don’t see it that way. There are separate options to Favourite or Bookmark a post. To me Bookmarking something is so you can refer to it later, although nothing is stopping you using Favourites that way.
Favourites get put on a list so you can refer to it later … and notify the poster that you’ve done so as a form of positive feedback.
Bookmarks get put on a list so you can refer to it later.
That’s the big difference.
Favourite and Bookmark are absolutely different things. They’re two different lists for you to use as you see fit.
Neither of them is a Like though. I’m not sure that fact is really debatable.I’ll have to disagree there. When you Favourite a post, the person that posted it gets a notification about the fact, while if you Bookmark something no notification is sent. In effect you are telling the person that you “Liked” their post.
Also, looking at the Explore section of Mastodon the following message is shown at the top of the feed:
These are posts from across the social web that are gaining traction today. Newer posts with more boosts and favorites are ranked higher.
So those Favourites are used by the algorithm to rank posts. Bookmarks are totally private and only used to save posts for your own use.
Lets try it this way. Would say your favourites things, include everything you like? Do you like some things that aren’t your favorite? Do you keep a list of everything you’ve ever liked? Would it be as big as the list of your favorite things?
Do you see the difference? It’s a mater of degree that separates them. They are not the same. That’s why they are two different words.
Your getting lost in lingual semantics. It’s just called “favourites” but it’s treated, at face value and at the code level, the same way other sites/systems treat the word “like”. That’s what matters. It could be called “Flibflabs” and still be a “like” replacement.
People will say stuff like “fave before replying” though. And most platforms with a like will be able to make you a list of everything you have liked.
So I think like maps to the little Mastodon star pretty well, even though it might not be meant to be used that way.
lol, and I was thinking I was supporting other’s users opinions.
You are in a way. Just not only that.
deleted by creator
Im glad you pointed out the algorithm thing. Seems like people get fed up with social media platforms like X(?) and Reddit and then come to alternatives demanding the same features that, at least in part, led to them being fed up in the first place.
I actually disagree with OPs assertion that these federated platforms are ‘almost as good’. Theyre better. More features doesnt mean a better platform and in my opinion often makes them worse.
[This comment has been deleted by an automated system]
I don’t want a fancy algorithm, I just want to see the popular posts from the communities I follow
Now, that’s not that simple either, since popular from a big community is different from popular from a small community, but still
[This comment has been deleted by an automated system]
Or you could do the most upvoted post minus its age, like a lot of sites still do. AFAIK hacker news does nothing fancy to its “algorithm”
[This comment has been deleted by an automated system]
I have found Mastodon still does that. And it turned out to be a problem, actually. I just kept going on there for no reason and reading like 100 nothings.
The original federated service is IRC and is still perfect. :)
adjusts glasses one could argue email is essentially a precursor to what we call federated services now, and it works as well as it always has. Predates IRC :)
IRC is great, if a little underground these days. It’s also trivial to run your own although federating requires cooperation from both ends so it’s not quite as networked as lemmy or mastodon.
This is a great analysis, thanks for compiling such a comprehensive response.
Essentially the main issue I have with Mastodon is that it’s UI is confusing AF.
Personally, I’m happy with both. Lemmy and Mastodon are far from perfect and both feel sorta beta, though Mastodon is further along.
Search is weak on both platforms, imo, but I expect it will improve eventually.
You mention favorite counts only being your instance, but same is true for community subscribers here.
Also landing on other instances from outside links can be confusing to find the same content in your instance (Mastodon and Lemmy).
Federation does make things more complicated. But it beats centralization.
In the end, it comes down to your personal end use and preferences.
Personally, I like Mastodon for conversations and I like Lemmy for community building - I mod [email protected] - and that works for me. 💕
(Though I’d kill for some consistent performance from Lemmy after trying to comment 3 times)
I don’t have any issues with it. I use Ice Cubes, it’s awesome.
Oh, so that explains why the ratio of favorites/boosts is so low on mastodon. I thought it was just a culture thing, where people rarely left likes on posts.
Turns out it was just a software quirk.
Mastodon’s search not applying to all posts is ‘a feature, not a bug’, as mentioned in the documentation:
Admins may optionally install full-text search. Mastodon’s full-text search allows logged-in users to find results from their own posts, their favourites, their bookmarks and their mentions. It deliberately does not allow searching for arbitrary strings in the entire database, in order to reduce the risk of abuse by people searching for controversial terms to find people to dogpile.
https://docs.joinmastodon.org/user/network/#search
I do understand the rationale behind it in that it makes it safer for people to share personal or political things to their followers without the risk of abuse from strangers, and the recommended alternative is to hashtag any post that’s okay to be publicly found.
The problem with this is that there is no agreement on which hashtags to use consistently, and that people are not used to, or feel a stigma about, adding hashtags to the end of each post.
I never used any bird app, curious: what’s the social stigma about adding hashtags? I thought it was seen as cool or at least normal. #justasking #stupidquestion
Some people consider it an overly attention-seeking behaviour, because overusing hashtags is associated with marketing and influencers trying desperately to gain maximum reach on platforms like Twitter and Instagram.
Meanwhile, on Mastodon it’s more of a thing to hashtag posts with like #photography or #[name_of_videogame] when sharing things, so other people with the same interests can find them.
Aside from any stigma, some people just don’t use them. Some don’t understand how they work, sometimes people forget.
Hashtags have value, but to make them essential instead of optional is a bad choice.
They have the stigma of overflowing the content and distracting from the human, let’s have a conversation, part to focus mostly on the promotion and algorithmic sorting and advertisement part. The most egregious example being the hash walls. Tweets were the actual content is a short sentence followed by a gigantic string of hashtags in the hopes this will get more exposition. The purposes of a tag is that you want to be found by people who don’t follow you, abuse of it screams attention-seeking.
This is the exact same issue I have about YouTube videos. If I ever see someone with 1k of terms in the description, I never watch their videos again. For example, I watched a video about a Doom mod. When I went to the description to look for the link, it was after ever doom related term. Everything from Doom Eternal (it was Doom 1993 mod) to demons, and shotgun. Just cringy.
Yoo, people who say “oh my, mastodon doesn’t have likes and algo and that’s what makes it perfect”, are you nuts? Good suggestion algorithms are the only thing we need in our services be it music, video streaming or social networks. I just came to mastodon, how do you expect me to find people to follow? It would be so much easier to select from somewhat relevant posts than to google who to follow on mastodon because its search engine works like crap. Lemmy is getting good now because of communities migrating from reddit, but huge accounts from twitter don’t sway so easily as mastodon is not so good as a twitter alternative
It almost feels like a generational difference. People who grew up before algorithms are used to curating everything they see, and see algorithms as a failing of the internet.
Those of us who grew up with algorithms enjoy good ones that promote content we really do want to see. The problem is that the really effective algorithms that benefit most of us also are the same ones that push right wing rhetoric because it’s successful.
I’m personally a fan of a good algorithm because I like seeing new stuff. The pre-2016 YouTube was a good example. Promoted stuff that I wanted to watch almost all the time, found a lot of new content that way
Yeah, mastodon definitely needs a better algorithm. Algorithms can be designed to promote whatever the maker wants. It doesn’t have to be designed to maximize engagement or the specific kind of engagement that tends to promote crazy conspiracy theories or fascist rhetoric. The algorithm could just be simple collaborative filtering with some randomness thrown in to pop “information bubbles,” which would be much better than what they have now.
Mastodon seems to have two goals: To be an example of how a federated alternative to Twitter can work well, and to be a healthier social media experience. It’s not obvious, but I think these goals conflict with each other. A lot of the features that are removed in the pursuit of a healthier social media will be perceived as the shortcomings of federation as a concept.
Basically this all over.
IMO, Mastodon is a paradox that the fediverse needs to move on from. It is not an alternative to Twitter, but, its popularity rests on this very perception. And so we have a dominant platform, that most consider to actually just be the whole fediverse, whose dominance is in many ways arbitrary or luck of circumstance. Which is fine … that’s how things happen. But the sooner we move on from Mastodon dominating the fediverse the better.
The way I’ve put it previously is that Mastodon is an awkward middle ground that actually doesn’t work too well for many people. It’s neither particularly safe/healthy or particularly engaging or interesting. And so many BIPOC avoid it while there are LGBTQ folks who openly consider it problematic and are ready to jump ship whenever necessary, while journalists and anyone who’s looking to form wide networks (without being influencers or doing anything for-profit) don’t see the point. In many ways, it’s the white/western suburbia of social media … and while that’s a nice place to visit or be sometimes, there’s a good reason to not live there or be there all the time, especially when online.
On top of all that, it’s actually a pretty simple/brutalist take on what social media can be, to the point of being unnecessarily backward. And yet, by the numbers, it is basically the fediverse (like literally
of active usersare on mastodon!).The fediverse can do better. Will do better, and already has.
- There’s firefish (and Misskey too, from which it was forked, and Iceshrimp and Hajkey which are forks of firefish)
- see firefish.social, nice examples: lead devs personal page
- Or, how far the special form of markdown can be taken, collected in another feature called
Clipswhich are collections of posts: Clips of cool MFM(misskey flavoured markdown).
- There’s Akkoma
- Then there’s Lemmy and kbin.
- There’s firefish (and Misskey too, from which it was forked, and Iceshrimp and Hajkey which are forks of firefish)
Hear hear! I thought I didn’t like the fediverse because Mastodon did such an awful job selling it to me. “Oh, I can’t view other instances’ local timelines without making accounts on them? What’s even the point of federation then?” But on Lemmy you can easily browse communities outside your own instance. So it’s not the fediverse’s fault, Mastodon just doesn’t have a clear audience.
And yeah, I can see how a lot of Mastodon’s features are “privacy-focused”, but I think it does TOO good a job, it’s so private that you can’t find anything!
So users viewing this post on another instance will see the same exact comments and upvotes?
Hi from lemm.ee👋
My understanding is yes, but only if the instances have federated with each other.
Indeed, at least that’s the idea. Viewing and posting from kbin.social.
That’s the idea, but in practice since the data exists independently on each server, it takes network time and computational time for them to align. In practice I expect comments to function as you expect, and upvotes to be slightly off depending on which instance you’re viewing from.
Things get a bit more weird when an instance gets defederated from another instance. My understanding here is that if you have instance A defederate from instance B, but instance B was listening to some of instance A’s communities, that instance B will have an independent replica of that community that doesn’t sync (this happened when beehaw defederated from open registration instances like lemmy.world).
It’s aboot time something worked so well innit?
-lemmy.ca
Hello from kbin.social 👋
Hello from feddit.de 👋
I think fundamentally Mastodon can’t work. The entire point of Twitter is for celebrities, brands and governments to have a single place to be able to send out a public message and for that message to be seen by everyone, especially those who opt in to it by following. Decentralized alternatives by definition can’t do that. Centralization is the entire point of Twitter.
Decentralization does work for Reddit/Lemmy though, because they are content centric, not person centric. I don’t care who posts content to the subreddits I follow, just that the content exists, can be easily viewed (RIP third party Reddit apps, hello Lemmy!), and is interesting. Lemmy doesn’t need hundreds of millions of people in a single place to create enough content that is interesting, and in fact having fewer people makes the content that is posted more interesting and focused. Lemmy’s decentralization is a strength because if this instance doesn’t have the interesting content I want, I can just go elsewhere.
The entire point of Twitter is for celebrities, brands and governments to have a single place to be able to send out a public message and for that message to be seen by everyone
Nothing about Mastodon or the fediverse prevents this. In fact government institutions are already using the fediverse this way: https://social.network.europa.eu/@EU_Commission https://social.overheid.nl/@belastingdienst There’s some companies who run their own instances also, and no shortage of individuals running single-user instances as a subdomain of the same website they use for their professional brand.
Decentralized =/= Federated. In a federated model, data is still siloed in 24/7 servers that are controlled by people or institutions.
I think it’s not that Mastodon couldn’t do it, it’s that it will end up just being an essentially centralized instance as people will want to be in the same instance as the people/companies they want to follow. How users would want to use Mastodon is counter-intuitive to how the fediverse should work. Lemmy is focused on content (posts and comments) which means there’s less somebody to follow and the focus is on the communities.
This is a semi serious question - do people not realize that you can follow across instances and it makes literally no difference?
This is the one reason why some of us were sort of hoping that Threads would federate. Because the celebs and other normies are likely to gravitate there, and there are a few that some of us would still like to follow/interact with.
If anything, this is my criticism against the way that Lemmy handles this. For example, my previous reddit habit was to follow a bunch of subs for TV shows that I watched. So last night when I was watching ST: Strange New Worlds, I really didn’t enjoy the experience of digging through 10 communities that each had the episode posts with the same 15 comments, and the occasional new thought. This isn’t even a criticism of the posters, if you came to the comments there would be some things that would be wild not to call out. I think ultimately I’d almost rather see the federation model for reddit-like services move down in the stack, and federate the communities rather than the whole instance. EG: there is a major ST collective community assimilating the smaller ones and becoming greater than the sum of their parts. Of course, this is also probably partially just because Lemmy/Kbin are still in their infancy, and I have a feeling that as time goes, things are more or less going to centralize in this way anyway, in the same way you could have multiple subs on reddit, but there was usually 1-2 big ones at most.
This isn’t a problem for mastodon, because when someone like Jeri Ryan joins, it doesn’t matter on what instance, I can still follow her in one place, see who she follows and follows her for other like-minded individuals, see all of her posts and re-posts, etc. What instance you’re on makes very little difference after the first five minutes or so and you’re acquainted with how it works.
You’re looking at it from the perspective of someone who already has a general understanding of fediverse. If Jeri Ryan joins an instance, which instance do you his followers will join? Most likely the same instance, because they’re here to follow Jeri and they don’t know what instance to choose so they choose the most familiar one, the one Jeri is on. New users will congregate on instances that have people they want to follow and the followees most likely join whichever instance is the biggest or has someone they want to follow (because it’s not like they know any better how to pick an instance), which means people will centralize on either one or a handful of instances.
You can even see this happening in with Lemmy. Most people don’t know which instance to pick so they picked the biggest one, lemmy.world.
I don’t think necessarily have a few large instances is problematic. It’s fine as long as people can move to other instances, the issue would be if those instances leverage their size to force incompatibilities or defederation.
