After the downfall of Twitter/X, many users switched to alternatives, because normal discussion on Twitter/X isn't possible anymore. Currently posts from the far-right spectrum get more engagement through Twitter's algorithm than posts not from this spectrum. This makes neutral discussions basically impossible.

Sadly not all users and company moved to the same platform. This can also be good because it doesn't create another monopoly, but from a pure user perspective this is not really nice. Some creators moved to Threads, while others moved to Bluesky and some to Mastodon. So to follow all of them you basically needed 3 accounts. One on each platform. Now...the issue is, that Threads is owned by Meta. Many people don't want to have an account on a platform owned by Meta (Facebook), because...well, they're not really that known for the best privacy tactics.

Decentralization

The good things

Mastodon is decentralized. Anyone can run their own server/instance. I myself for example run the Mastodon (glitch-soc) instance glitch.braydmedia.de.

This is really awesome when it comes to having a social media platform that is not and cannot be controlled by one central entity like it's the case with Threads. Why is that good? Simply because no one can buy it to turn it into a hate platform like it happened with Twitter/X.

The bad things

While Mastodon is awesome for decentralization and while I personally think that decentralization is very important, which makes Mastodon my personal favorite, we also have to acknowledge, that Mastodon is not Twitter and will never be Twitter. For people coming from Twitter it is different. They are usually used to have a social media feed that mostly pushes posts that have a high engagement of likes. On Mastodon however boosts (retweets) are more important and likes basically only matter for people on your own instance. - Which is not relevant for small instances.

The other thing about Mastodon is that users have to pick a server and that currently (I think there's being work done on that, if I understand the code correctly) likes (favorites) and comments are not always federated. Picking a server may be an easy to understand task for people that are tech-savy but for others, who have no clue about tech and just use products "at the tip of the iceberg" this can be an issue. Which can be seen by the fact that many ask about why you need to pick a server, etc. and some people don't understand the concept of decentralization entirely and ask questions like if you need to create an account on multiple servers. (Psst 🤫 you don't need to)

Then when those users picked a server and registered, they (especially on smaller servers) may get to think that there's not much interaction, because currently likes don't federate and not all comments of a post federate. You have to visit the original instance the post came from to see the actual, total amount of likes and all the comments. I think that for - again - non-technical users this can be very confusing.

Don't get me wrong, I love Mastodon and it's my personal favorite of all these three alternatives, but it's still different. And many people don't want to have something different from what they're used to have. I think it's also a good thing not to have an algorithm by default on Mastodon so that all posts of people you follow are in a chronological order, but I still like the choice to pick from different feeds that Bluesky has. A chronological feed can be good because it doesn't give you biased posts, based on an algorithm, but it can also be bad in case you weren't online when the people you are following posted something. Thus it can happen, that you miss their posts. Especially if they live in a different time zone than you. It has it's good sides but also it's bad sides and I think it highly depends on which type of user you are and which type of concept you prefer in this case.

Decentralization at Bluesky

Bluesky also says it is decentralized. But technically some things are and some things are not. For example I run my own PDS (Yes, I run a Mastodon and a Bluesky server) at https://braydsocial.eu (let me know if you need an invite code). This is awesome, but some things like the identity system, that validates the DID's (the usernames on Bluesky) is centralized. This ensures that there's a central directory of users, which can be good, but it also causes the issue, that it's only partly decentralized. I still think this is much better than Threads which is fully centralized. They are working on opening up to the Fediverse (Mastodon, Misskey, etc.), but they haven't opened up fully yet, and federation is not at available for accounts inside the EU at all.

A ranking list of decentralization

If I'd do a ranking list about decentralization of those platforms it would look like this:

1. Mastodon: It is fully decentralized.
2. Bluesky: It has decentralized PDS' (instances/servers), but some core parts of the network are centralized. For example private messaging on Bluesky or the identity server.
3. Threads: Yes, it is opening up partly to the Fediverse, but currently it's still centralized for the most part and it's owned by Meta. So even if they open up fully, their intentions can be questioned.

Meta and therefore Threads going the Twitter/X way

At the moment we are nearing the second presidency of Donald Trump in the US. Since he is far-right and has many parallels to previous fascist leaders it seems like Zuckerberg (the founder of Meta/Facebook) is going the Twitter/X way. He has removed pride themes from Facebook Messenger and announced that Meta will be moderating less in the future. Currently for the most part stripping away rights of the LGBTQ+ community who have been fighting for those rights online a long time. This development is in my opinion alarming.

I personally really like Threads because it has a good mix of discovery and interaction and it simply has good algorithms when it comes to finding and staying in your bubble (which can be good, but can also push people into extremism). However I will not put my focus on Threads even though I have found some awesome mutuals there, because I don't want to support such a development towards more hate speech and less rights for the LGBTQ+ community.

My personal take on Twitter alternatives

I will personally use Mastodon and Bluesky with a focus and run a server for both. I love both platforms and think that one of them is the future when it comes to a good Twitter/X replacement. I don't want to hop on the train to build my online presence around Threads. Even though I could get much more engagement there (probably), I don't want to move primarily to a platform that seems to have a dark future too.

The platforms and their primary properties in summary

Mastodon

• Fully decentralized
• Can't be controlled by a central authority
• No algorithm; Feed is chronological
• Currently a bit more tech focused
• Likes don't federate
• Also very good for activists, governments, NGO's, etc.
• Fully Open Source
• Allows for awesome third party clients like https://phanpy.social

Bluesky

• Partly decentralized
• Partly centralized
• Can be partly controlled by a central authority
• Alternative networks can be built on top of the protocol, but it would be seperate from "Bluesky" as a product
• May seem better for non-technical users than Mastodon
• Fully Open Source (as far as I understand / saw)
• Offers decentralized algorithms / feeds, that anyone can build, including a chronological timeline like Mastodon has
• Also allows for third party clients but doesn't offer the same choice as Mastodon does already

Threads

• Fully centralized
• Partly connected to the Fediverse for users outside of the EU
• App includes many trackers
• Owned by Meta which in my opinion is not trustworthy
• Heavily based on an algorithm that finds your matching bubble and keeps you in it

Don't forget...

🦣 Follow me on Mastodon here.
🦋 Follow me on Bluesky here.
💶 Donate to me here if you like my work, so I can keep this blog running.
📧 Subscribe to this blog here to get new mails straight to your inbox.