Hello Lemmy! So, let’s talk free speech, and social media networks. I’m quite curious why Lemmy and Raddle seem to be the only two (as far as I can tell) alternatives to reddit that are not as toxic compared to other alternatives, like Communities.Win, or ruqqus. I’m aware that Lemmy has a no bigot/hate speech rule, which is great. Raddle seems to support free speech also, but to an extent. How come some alternatives survive and others slowly decline?
I think it’s also depending on whether or not the network is able to reach critical mass: a sufficient number of adopters of a new idea, technology or innovation in a social system so that the rate of adoption becomes self-sustaining and creates further growth. Now to reach critical mass for a social media network the following factors are important: money, hype/publicity/marketing, quality of the network and timing. Social networks often fail due to lack of money and being unable to generate enough publicity. Kind of a Catch-22. Federated networks may be able to avoid the money issue by spreading the burden of the costs over many instances and not having to satisfy shareholders. This can contribute to their chance of survival in the long run provided that a opportunity comes by where one or multiple incidents generate enough influx of new users.