Substack will never be Twitter. But for journalists, readers, politicians and intellectuals, Substack is surprisingly well positioned as the best place to go for Twitter quitters.
Hhmm. I created my Substack account a while ago and never came back until getting your post in my e-mail.
I'm not sure if I will be a Twitter Quitter (ha ha, love that term) but I will be taking another look at Substack.
I also agree that Mastodon is not for everybody. It might have spiked with new users for now but I doubt they will stay for the long run. It is fair to say that it's the Linux of social plataforms, being miles away from what Twitter can currently do.
I will be waiting out the Twitter chaoes that is going on now and see what happens; yet, I am open to explore what else is out there.
* Most posts consist of blurb, screenshot, and link to the "full content"
* Show me only feeds I've subscribed to, unless I explicitly enter some view to explore the wider world.
* easy to perma-block anyone who's clearly going to annoy me without being afraid they'll consider me having disowned them from the family (the Facebook problem).
* comments system where each account is given full control to moderate/block as they see fit.
In this way, twitter was oddly perfect. Short posts, links, and a screenshot have been the status quo. It's been really useful in our local community for sharing county announcements and emergency information, but also the critical item is that almost all useful posts on twitter LINK TO ANOTHER SITE WITH FULL CONTENT.
The ideal network to me is a fancified RSS feed with screenshots, subscriptions controls, and lots of moderation controls. Aka, Twitter.
So far I don't see substack replacing that at all. More like Substack ends up being one of the popular sites that's being linked to FROM a site like twitter. So far, overall, discoverability in substack is slow and painful. It lacks an "attract mode" (gaming industry term). But also, adding one will necessarily alienate existing users who like a comparatively quiet slow-paced social circle that exists here currently.
I think life is better if the content sites and the RSS feeds that make them discoverable remain separate. What we need is a new RSS feed to replace Twitter, and ideally one not named Truth Social.
You're probably right. However, it is possible. Imagine if Substack added an RSS feature, and all subscription posts, comments, replies, likes and Chats -- plus RSS items -- were placed into a single reverse-chronological stream. That would be killer.
Enjoyed this take. I like Substack for all of the reasons you mentioned, but haven't figured out a smart way to integrate it with my existing email list.
This makes me want to publish more of my writing on here. If for nothing else other than greater opportunities for others to discover my writing, podcasts, and other work.
I know, right? I'm really loving Substack these days. Everybody uses it as a newsletter publisher. But why not use it as a blog? As a social network? As a message board?
I’ve got my own Substack now and am using it to pass along links to other Substackers. And excited to see the photos I use to decorate the space aren’t compressed terrible and look good for a change. It’s auto-set to disallow “right click save” - woot!
That certainly has been true. But, don't ignore the remarkable progress Twitter has made lately and its much larger user base. I use X professionally for world-class, actionable energy research. Admittedly, I am still a minority in that regard.
So, you were OK with Twitter being run by ignorant communist activists and the FBI? Elon actually saved X and his reforms are the reason I decided to subscribe to Blue and stay.
All that sounds like pure bullshit to me. Let's start with the basics: Elon is killing Twitter, culturally and financially. It's a cesspool now and I won't use it. Twitter was always flawed, but I think they did a vastly better job that Elon Musk and his extremely hardcore skeleton crew.
The FBI paid twitter $3.5 million for that "pure bullshit" and the new "skeleton crew" is either amazingly efficient or the old mob was just a bunch of useless activists.
Elon has added so many new features that should have been done years ago, like longer posts, blue, spaces, grok. Why not sooner? The old team was obviously incompetent, technically.
James Baker was the FBI's General Counsel that was fired in disgrace for violating his oath to the US Constitution. He was then hired by twitter to lead the team of other former government political operatives to process daily commands from the White House to delete accounts, censor and even plant misinformation about elections.
There's actually a strong correlation now between censorship and the growth of these platforms. The ones that are growing are the ones that do less censoring. This post, for example, would be deleted on Facebook or YouTube, so I don't ever post there and their users suffer in perpetual ignorance.
It makes no sense to compare these platforms and denigrate Elon for making changes when the censorship and trust issues are actually the biggest issues for many users.
It's my high-quality sources that prove you're wrong. Your only source is USA Today, an obsolete tabloid newspaper. You are either incredibly naive or paid by some Soros-backed group to bash Elon.
Show me anyone else who thinks my sources are "bullshit". Anyone, anyone at all. I'll wait.
Can you even name a single legitimate and constitutional reason for the US government to be paying ANY social media platform to censor and spread misinformation?
Sorry to embarrass you so badly. But, it's what happens when you live in a bubble and slander people for fun and profit.
Hhmm. I created my Substack account a while ago and never came back until getting your post in my e-mail.
I'm not sure if I will be a Twitter Quitter (ha ha, love that term) but I will be taking another look at Substack.
I also agree that Mastodon is not for everybody. It might have spiked with new users for now but I doubt they will stay for the long run. It is fair to say that it's the Linux of social plataforms, being miles away from what Twitter can currently do.
I will be waiting out the Twitter chaoes that is going on now and see what happens; yet, I am open to explore what else is out there.
What I want from a "social media feed":
* Most posts consist of blurb, screenshot, and link to the "full content"
* Show me only feeds I've subscribed to, unless I explicitly enter some view to explore the wider world.
* easy to perma-block anyone who's clearly going to annoy me without being afraid they'll consider me having disowned them from the family (the Facebook problem).
* comments system where each account is given full control to moderate/block as they see fit.
In this way, twitter was oddly perfect. Short posts, links, and a screenshot have been the status quo. It's been really useful in our local community for sharing county announcements and emergency information, but also the critical item is that almost all useful posts on twitter LINK TO ANOTHER SITE WITH FULL CONTENT.
The ideal network to me is a fancified RSS feed with screenshots, subscriptions controls, and lots of moderation controls. Aka, Twitter.
So far I don't see substack replacing that at all. More like Substack ends up being one of the popular sites that's being linked to FROM a site like twitter. So far, overall, discoverability in substack is slow and painful. It lacks an "attract mode" (gaming industry term). But also, adding one will necessarily alienate existing users who like a comparatively quiet slow-paced social circle that exists here currently.
I think life is better if the content sites and the RSS feeds that make them discoverable remain separate. What we need is a new RSS feed to replace Twitter, and ideally one not named Truth Social.
You're probably right. However, it is possible. Imagine if Substack added an RSS feature, and all subscription posts, comments, replies, likes and Chats -- plus RSS items -- were placed into a single reverse-chronological stream. That would be killer.
Enjoyed this take. I like Substack for all of the reasons you mentioned, but haven't figured out a smart way to integrate it with my existing email list.
This makes me want to publish more of my writing on here. If for nothing else other than greater opportunities for others to discover my writing, podcasts, and other work.
I would love to see Musk crash and burn. He is good company with Trump. Both love to hear themselves speak.
Musk will go politics in the next five years. Too much money and not enough empathy.
Americans seen to buy every lie that leaves their mouths..
I think it's inevitable at this point that Musk "Kanyes" at some point.
It’s time to find a new place to follow interesting people. I don’t see the benefits of Elon being CEO of everything.
I know, right? I'm really loving Substack these days. Everybody uses it as a newsletter publisher. But why not use it as a blog? As a social network? As a message board?
It looks good but I guess it also depends how they market their product, as a newsletter subscription or as a social media platform too.
I’ve got my own Substack now and am using it to pass along links to other Substackers. And excited to see the photos I use to decorate the space aren’t compressed terrible and look good for a change. It’s auto-set to disallow “right click save” - woot!
Substack so far has got the best signal to noise ratio if one's interested in knowledge and learning something.
The others like Twitter seem to exist mostly to manipulate one's emotions for the longest duration possible.
That certainly has been true. But, don't ignore the remarkable progress Twitter has made lately and its much larger user base. I use X professionally for world-class, actionable energy research. Admittedly, I am still a minority in that regard.
So, you were OK with Twitter being run by ignorant communist activists and the FBI? Elon actually saved X and his reforms are the reason I decided to subscribe to Blue and stay.
All that sounds like pure bullshit to me. Let's start with the basics: Elon is killing Twitter, culturally and financially. It's a cesspool now and I won't use it. Twitter was always flawed, but I think they did a vastly better job that Elon Musk and his extremely hardcore skeleton crew.
The FBI paid twitter $3.5 million for that "pure bullshit" and the new "skeleton crew" is either amazingly efficient or the old mob was just a bunch of useless activists.
Elon has added so many new features that should have been done years ago, like longer posts, blue, spaces, grok. Why not sooner? The old team was obviously incompetent, technically.
James Baker was the FBI's General Counsel that was fired in disgrace for violating his oath to the US Constitution. He was then hired by twitter to lead the team of other former government political operatives to process daily commands from the White House to delete accounts, censor and even plant misinformation about elections.
There's actually a strong correlation now between censorship and the growth of these platforms. The ones that are growing are the ones that do less censoring. This post, for example, would be deleted on Facebook or YouTube, so I don't ever post there and their users suffer in perpetual ignorance.
It makes no sense to compare these platforms and denigrate Elon for making changes when the censorship and trust issues are actually the biggest issues for many users.
https://environmentalprogress.org/big-news/2023/11/29/censorship-industrial-complex-part-2-michael-shellenberger-testifies-before-congress
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_A._Baker_(government_attorney)
The FBI paid Twitter to process requests for information, as it always does according to standard practice. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2023/01/18/fact-check-fbi-gave-3-million-twitter-information-requests/11033845002/
Also standard practice at nearly all companies: Vetting internal communication before releasing it to the press.
You can make up any kind of bullshit you want, or believe the bullshit of others, but it doesn't make the bullshit true.
It's my high-quality sources that prove you're wrong. Your only source is USA Today, an obsolete tabloid newspaper. You are either incredibly naive or paid by some Soros-backed group to bash Elon.
Show me anyone else who thinks my sources are "bullshit". Anyone, anyone at all. I'll wait.
Can you even name a single legitimate and constitutional reason for the US government to be paying ANY social media platform to censor and spread misinformation?
Sorry to embarrass you so badly. But, it's what happens when you live in a bubble and slander people for fun and profit.