1134
Debian is Ditching X (Twitter) Citing These Reasons
(news.itsfoss.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 30 Jan 2025
1134 points (98.3% liked)
Linux
49461 readers
848 users here now
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
- No misinformation
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Wild that so many are still hanging out at the Nazi bar
Yes, I'm sadly surprised by many open source projects still posting on that cesspool
The problem is for organizations it's harder to leave because that is where the people you want to reach are. That's the only reason any org or company is on social media in the first place. If they leave too soon they risk too many people not seeing the things they send out to the community.
It's more an individual thing because so many people just have social inertia and haven't left since everyone they know is already there. The first to leave have to decide if they want to juggle using another platform to keep connections or cut off connections by abandoning the established platform.
That doesn't explain why they don't start a transition by posting to both the new platform and the old. And not including links to their new account on their websites.
Doesn't Twitter directly suppress such links? I remember there was a crackdown on people linking their mastodon accounts a while back.
And external links in general get a huge suppression in the algorithm because Twitter does not want to recommend tweets that take you off the site.
The platform actively fights you if you want to move elsewhere (which should really be a telltale sign for you to move), so I get why some orgs struggle with that decision. Doubly so if your job relies on the platform's outreach.
I'm talking about posting on their website a link to alternative social media accounts.
yeah, it’s so inconvenient to not directly support the nazi platform
If I ran an org, that needed to reach a community of say... 1000 people in need, and 900 of those people were ONLY on twitter, guess what?
That org needs to be on twitter, even if President Musk is profiting from it. Otherwise, the org would be remiss in their mission.
nice hypothetical but no
Not really a hypothetical though. Its the very reason I kept a non-profit's account on twitter, and facebook, and instagram, for as long as I did - Because we HAD to in order to effectively hit the mission for the non profit.
sounds lazy, uncreative, and ineffective
What would be the unlazy, creative, and effective strategy?
BTW, remaining where our community members are is very effective at messaging to the community we need to communicate with...
I wouldn't argue with the dude; he's got a clear case of bad-faith-itis. What you did was bad, so you shouldn't have done it, but no I won't tell you how to fix it.
The absolute best you could have done is cross-posted to a Mastodon/Bluesky/whatever account as well, but you can't just always go around yanking the rug out underneath communities especially if you're in a position where it's not just lazy shitposting and worthless commentary.
...that said, you have moved anything you can to being posted somewhere in tandem riiiiiiight?
Open another channel and tell everyone that the main channel is the new one. And tell them how to join the new channel, step by step.
Effective was a requirement.
how am i supposed to give you a better strategy when you’re just giving the vaguest possible “scenario”.
here’s a good strategy:
don’t support nazi’s.
boycott all nazis.
they make money off advertising to users, by being a user, you are financially supporting nazis… stop it.
pretending like the only possible way to communicate with your desired audience is by supporting nazis is uncreative, ineffective, lazy, and destructive… that reasoning is why places like that continue to exist and grow.
Its that social inertia, and I get it.
I ran a neighborhood group's social media, and even after FB turned openly shitty, I had to stay on there, because thats where people are.
I mean, I could have pushed the org to drop them, but then we would have lost the eyeballs of thousands of neighbor's we're trying to work FOR.
Same deal with Twitter, they've just gotten to the point where most NPOs lose less by leaving than they would by staying.
The answer (IMO) is to open another channel and announce it so people can migrate. And start using more the other channels, using each time FB/X a little less, until (almost) everyone has left FB/X.
You're forgetting the (often) free labor used to make changes like this are limited.
I, for example, did not get paid for the 20 hrs/week I was putting into the organization, as I was also a board member, their IT person, and for a couple of periods, board president...
Its a cost/benefit analysis.
That's beginning to wane. The fewer major posters there are, the fewer people will look to the site for information. And the fewer people on there looking for info...etc.
Yep, it's viable now for many orgs...
Because they allow smoking
its not surprising considering the overlap. many linux users are cryptofascists, i.e. luke smith
Everyone who have use Twitter in the past 2 years is a nazi.
That's a very silly take