Post ATmhpElZQaNF3Mh1XM by rym@mastodon.rym.social
 (DIR) More posts by rym@mastodon.rym.social
 (DIR) Post #ATmhpElZQaNF3Mh1XM by rym@mastodon.rym.social
       2023-03-19T20:08:22Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       Whenever anyone complains that the “algorithm” on some social media site reduced their “reach” or “engagement” remember that most people don’t want ads and other promotional content in their feeds AT ALL. The algo suppresses these because people don’t want to see them.
       
 (DIR) Post #ATmhpFMRDVrethwT0C by T045T@scl.zmb.cm
       2023-03-19T20:30:48Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @rym this probably doesn’t affect the same people you’re talking about, but isn’t there also the thing where $PLATFORM deprioritizes your posts (even in the feeds of people that explicitly follow you) once you hit a certain follower count, to convince you to pay for reach?(I thought that’s what “like, subscribe *and hit the bell* was all about)
       
 (DIR) Post #ATmhtC49PRoLpwGp0q by rym@mastodon.rym.social
       2023-03-19T20:31:35Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @T045T Decent platforms still let you see every post of every account you subscribe to.Platforms that force algorithmic content regardless of subscription into people's feeds are trash.
       
 (DIR) Post #ATmiPOvh7Od500flaK by T045T@scl.zmb.cm
       2023-03-19T20:37:25Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @rym I don’t disagree. And leaving those platforms (both as a subscriber and a “content producer”) is a good thing to do.I guess I’m trying to say _some_ of the griping over reach is a way of saying exactly that: “The platform I’m on is trash”, maybe with an implicit “but I won’t get out, so I’d like it to change.”I also guess the majority of it is shitheads mad they can’t force more people to read their posts though, just to be clear.