Replying to Avatar πŸ₯©β„π•–π•Ÿπ•–π•˜π•’π••π•– ₿𝕦π•₯π•”π•™π•–π•£βš‘

Hot take:

OnlyZaps is a cult.

Now don't get mad, I respect your right to be in whatever cult or religion you choose, follow who you want, and absolutely self determine. We all get into weird shit and end up in weird places.

But....the OnlyZaps phenomena is completely about limiting yourself to a particular mindset where you monetize everything. It's an ideology spearheaded by popular individuals, and their fans lead the charge chanting for their new way to be the only way. And when there's push back, they recant to "You have choices but you really should try it!"

Have you heard of our lord and savior OnlyZaps? The like button is the devil! It could be a bot! It could be manipulating youj into a fiat mindset! How dare numbers on a screen give you a perception of the reach of a particular note, numbers are always fake unless there are sats attached! Now chant with me *Ohhhhmmmmm Satoshiiiiiiii, Only Sats for the HODLord, Ohhhhhmmmmm likes are shitcoins*

In all thijngs we must be mindful of extremes. We've all survived shitty social media, let's not fall into the trap of overcorrection and alienate everyone who doesn't think like you. I'm 100% pro zap, without being anti-like. I don't wish to choose sides and fight stupid clique wars. I don't want tk live left VS right, stay in your box, here are my labels bullshit. Let's all let each other choose for once. And if you choose to not see or participate in likes, that's entirely your right.
Avatar
elsat 2y ago

I don’t understand why an opt-in feature is controversial.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Avatar
πŸ₯©β„π•–π•Ÿπ•–π•˜π•’π••π•– ₿𝕦π•₯π•”π•™π•–π•£βš‘ 2y ago

Because those who opt-in alternate between brow-beating everyone else to join them in their choice and demanding that it should be the only way.

Those speaking loudest about it absolutely believe likes are evil and want them gone entirely. Which is why they're still talking about it even though they have the ability to opt-out of them.

72
nobody 2y ago

#[4]​ earned huge respect from me when he made the feature opt in and only affecting the opted in person’s feed.

IMO that made the feature πŸ’―% uncontroversial and something I supported. Users deserve absolute control over what they see and what they get notified over.

I believe, unless I’m mistaken, #[2]​ is referring to a cultural phenomenon, not the technological feature.

Avatar
πŸ₯©β„π•–π•Ÿπ•–π•˜π•’π••π•– ₿𝕦π•₯π•”π•™π•–π•£βš‘ 2y ago

I am, I'm not in any way against the feature's existence or anybody who chooses to use it! I'm just irritated by the constant virtue signaling about how it's so much better, and that should be the standard, or how their life magically changed and their aunt's cat was cured of cancer because they can't see likes.

If you want to centralize your social media experience and limit features you should checkout Bluesky, I hear they like echo chambers.

Avatar
elsat 2y ago

Ah, I got you πŸ™