Fediverse and parasocial relationships

  • Shouldn’t the fediverse discourage patterns that create parasocial relationships?

  • Wouldn’t it be better if the standard was a symmetrical relationship between users instead of the asymmetrical follow model?

  • Most big social medias thrive on parasocial-relations, is it necessary to emulate that model for success?

  • Shouldn’t we focus on community building and mutual friendship instead of forcing everyone to be a mini-celebrity?

  • Aren’t communities/groups better for discoverability than the public feeds of mastodon, pleroma,etc

  • GrassrootsReview
    4·
    3 years ago

    One could create a part of the fediverse like that for people who just want to chat and make friends.

    It would be a poor model for a lot of what I am interested in. I am mostly interested in niche information. One Mastodon account of mine is on translating the scientific literature. Many of the people following Translate Science write in languages I do not master; those are the people who would benefit most from translations. It makes no sense to follow them back.

    We could also create a part of the fediverse that is even better at spreading niche information. For example, that would have team accounts so that multiple people can contribute/moderate an information feed.

    I started understanding what parasocial relationships mean when I explored Twitch. I am not aware of anything on Mastodon that comes close to that. I do not have the feeling that people feel they are friends of the people behind the largest accounts I know of; but everyone has their own feed.

    A diversity of strategies is normally best. The great thing of the Fediverse is that that is possible.