osteophage

Taking the Cohost dark mode debate as another case study:

In addition to all the usual reasons that conflicts can be aggravating and disheartening, the Cohost dark mode debate is extra annoying to read through because of two things: 1) people have spread it over a lot of separate posts, and 2) barely anyone ever links to what they're talking about. This means it's hard to get a handle of what's going on and easy to misrepresent what other people are saying.

So in light of that, I am not attempting to summarize the debate in this post. Instead, this post features a wall of links. I want you to look at these links and weigh the prospect of clicking through and reading each them, or most of them, or even half of them. How motivated do you feel to do that?

In relation to the number of people involved, this is an excessive number of posts. Look at how many of these posts are repeat posts by the same user, posts so short they could have easily been a comment, or posts which are direct extensions or elaborations on a previous post. Unfortunately Cohost comment sections feel like square tires to use, so instead people scatter to the winds, making new posts and reblog-additions.

This scale of fragmentation ties into another recurring problem: very few of these original posts provide links to what they're talking about. Mostly they refer to other posts by paraphrasing/summary/implication, or occasionally with screenshots of text. If you weren't in the right place at the right time, you'd have very little means to get context on what they're talking about. It's vaguepost central.

So on that note, let's play a game. Try clicking some links and reading some of these posts. As you read, consciously look for opportunities to ask, "Where are you seeing that?" or "Which post are you responding to?" Give yourself a point for each time you see that the question hasn't been answered within the post. Keep track and let me know in the comments how many points you earned before you quit the game.

Last edited 3 months ago.

TAGS coy txt, cohost, dark mode, cohost dark mode debate, link compilation, thoughts on how to argue w people

Add a Comment

wow, i thought i had seen the originating posts for myself but apparently i missed a solid 25% of the actual posts relating to this! (and lord knows how many that are lost to the ether coz they were deleted right after and/or untagged). just total insanity.

it's struck me as interesting that i'm seeing patterns in how conflict on cohost plays out, in that it typically involves roughly around the same 10-15 users, the same few topics - very frequently about accessibility, i'm noticing - and it always manifests roughly the same way: strung out painfully over a few days with barely any resolution at the end. given that there's no way staff can't be aware that this culture has manifested, i sort of wonder if they're very satisfied with this development or if they wish things were different.

also, i did not even try to play the game because having been on cohost for a while now i knew i'd rack up too damn many points lmao i do appreciate seeing some users try to reconnect dots and add more context but at this point, idk what it would take to make for a grander cultural shift. given that cohost is inheriting its own tumblr refugees, i can only see this issue compounding.

lord knows how many that are lost to the ether coz they were deleted right after and/or untagged

Yeah in between my initial gathering of links and the process of checking the links in order to post them today, I found that several I'd saved had since been deleted. Plus I gathered these links by checking one tag and then checking the blogs of some of the users who I'd seen psoting about it, so who knows how much I missed. Definitely not a comprehensive list here. I figured it was enough to make a point, though.

Which posts initially seemed like the "start" for you? I remember seeing the Wyatt comic strip edit and being unsure what that could refer to, and when I saw the Arachnixe Happy Birthday post I initially thought that must've been the inciting incident, but then I realized that the timestamps were the other way around.

i sort of wonder if they're very satisfied with this development or if they wish things were different.

Well, Kara did post her own statement on the matter, featuring the words "Your page is your own. Post as you wish" and "You do not need to defend us." She also points out that the "doom loop of vaguemetaposting and bizarrely placed pity" is unproductive and pointless. I think the overall gesture there makes sense. At the same time, I agree with a commenter who points out this post takes a weirdly casual tone while talking on behalf of staff as an "us," sort of blurring the line between a personal post and an official staff statement, which seems unwise.

Anyway -- I do think they wish things were different. I don't think they've connected the dots on why things are the way they are.

also, i did not even try to play the game

Alas!

at this point, idk what it would take to make for a grander cultural shift.

Well, I have my theories.

As I've pointed out above, the posting rate is excessive. I figure the Cohost interface makes it feel smoother and more comfortable to post or reblog with additions rather than comment, so people post as much as or more than they participate in comment chains. I associate this with a general dynamic of talking at people rather than with them, like people only want to say stuff if it can get broadcasted to the feed. Always angling for the spotlight, never chatting around the water cooler. I don't know if anyone else sees it the same way, but combined with how it feels like pulling teeth to get anyone to have a conversation with me, it feels like people want the megaphone more than they want to interact, you know? I'm not even saying that's how they actually feel; that's just the atmosphere that comes across -- really loud and competitive and cold.

It's also worth noting that this particular debate erupted in the wake of plenty of other miscellaneous conflicts that have populated the #cohost meta tag. That sense of lingering unrelsolved hurt can build up a culture of mistrust where users are used to seeing each other as unreasonable and where patience is already strained. Personally I know that when it comes to people I've already had bad experiences with, seeing them shoot their mouths off once again doesn't make me feel any more willing to have patience or stick my neck out by assuming the best of them. What it make me feel is guarded, irritable, tired, and less willing to directly engage.

All of that, I figure, is bad news for how people will go on to handle ensuing conflicts. Conflicts are easy to start and hard to resolve. It can take a lot of patience, empathy, curiosity, good faith, emotional self-regulation, and worst of all, listening to people we're disagreeing with. It's a genuinely demanding undertaking. And if Cohost users barely talk directly to each other at the best of times, we shouldn't expect things to turn out any better when they're stressed out or mad.

So long story short: I don't know if you can stop that mudslide of a site culture once it's started, but I'd be interested to see what happens if they fixed the comment system and added a followers-only setting on posts.

Choose Avatar

<blockquote>lord knows how many that are lost to the ether coz they were deleted right after and/or untagged</blockquote>Yeah in between my initial gathering of links and the process of checking the links in order to post them today, I found that several I'd saved had since been deleted. Plus I gathered these links by checking one tag and then checking the blogs of some of the users who I'd seen psoting about it, so who knows how much I missed. Definitely not a comprehensive list here. I figured it was enough to make a point, though. Which posts initially seemed like the "start" for you? I remember seeing the Wyatt <a href="https://cohost.org/auramgold/post/3441920-i-don-t-get-why-peo">comic strip edit</a> and being unsure what that could refer to, and when I saw the Arachnixe <a href="https://cohost.org/arachnixe/post/3444101-happy-birthday-to-th">Happy Birthday post</a> I initially thought that must've been the inciting incident, but then I realized that the timestamps were the other way around. <blockquote>i sort of wonder if they're very satisfied with this development or if they wish things were different.</blockquote>Well, Kara did post <a href="https://cohost.org/kaara/post/3466580-clarifying-giving-fe">her own statement</a> on the matter, featuring the words "Your page is your own. Post as you wish" and "You do not need to defend us." She also points out that the "doom loop of vaguemetaposting and bizarrely placed pity" is unproductive and pointless. I think the overall gesture there makes sense. At the same time, I agree with a commenter who points out this post takes a weirdly casual tone while talking on behalf of staff as an "us," sort of blurring the line between a personal post and an official staff statement, which seems unwise. Anyway -- I do think they wish things were different. I don't think they've connected the dots on why things are the way they are. <blockquote>also, i did not even try to play the game</blockquote>Alas! <blockquote>at this point, idk what it would take to make for a grander cultural shift. </blockquote>Well, I have my theories. As I've pointed out above, the posting rate is excessive. I figure the Cohost interface makes it feel smoother and more comfortable to post or reblog with additions rather than comment, so people post as much as or more than they participate in comment chains. I associate this with a general dynamic of talking at people rather than with them, like people only want to say stuff if it can get broadcasted to the feed. Always angling for the spotlight, never chatting around the water cooler. I don't know if anyone else sees it the same way, but combined with how it feels like pulling teeth to get anyone to have a conversation with me, it feels like people want the megaphone more than they want to interact, you know? I'm not even saying that's how they actually feel; that's just the atmosphere that comes across -- really loud and competitive and cold. It's also worth noting that this particular debate erupted in the wake of plenty of other miscellaneous conflicts that have populated the #cohost meta tag. That sense of lingering unrelsolved hurt can build up a culture of mistrust where users are used to seeing each other as unreasonable and where patience is already strained. Personally I know that when it comes to people I've already had bad experiences with, seeing them shoot their mouths off once again doesn't make me feel any more willing to have patience or stick my neck out by assuming the best of them. What it make me feel is guarded, irritable, tired, and less willing to directly engage. All of that, I figure, is bad news for how people will go on to handle ensuing conflicts. Conflicts are easy to start and hard to resolve. It can take a lot of patience, empathy, curiosity, good faith, emotional self-regulation, and worst of all, listening to people we're disagreeing with. It's a genuinely demanding undertaking. And if Cohost users barely talk directly to each other at the best of times, we shouldn't expect things to turn out any better when they're stressed out or mad. So long story short: I don't know if you can stop that mudslide of a site culture once it's started, but I'd be interested to see what happens if they fixed the comment system and added a followers-only setting on posts.

first post i recognized that something may be afoot was arachnixe's original 'happy birthday' post, but a lot of these middle-toward-the-end posts i lost track of b/c the cohost meta tag just kept getting FLOODED. seeing them all in one place makes me realize that the cohost meta tag itself is practically a 'containment' tag for these discussions, as no other tag i bookmarked (nor user i followed) made much of a peep about it. hence why it feels like the same several people kicking up dust every so often.

i also completely agree with that megaphone comment. i've considered that it may be partly to prevent a degree of silencing - by posting YOUR opinion on YOUR blog, you cut people off from essentially silencing you via blocking you. this also prevents other users from having the 'final word' so to speak and deleting your commentary entirely. which like lol that's the nature of commenting on other people's posts... their posts are their house, so when you leave comments they have every right to clean up 'their house' so to speak.

i would love a followers-only setting for posts just to help circumvent some of this, but i worry that it would get abused for people to essentially form their own little echo chambers and stop dissent from ever reaching their shores. which is technically everyone's right to do so - you shouldn't have to put up with shit online out of some noble crusade against bias - but that's something i have thought about as well, especially with all of these folks who were basically twitter natives.

i worry that it would get abused for people to essentially form their own little echo chambers and stop dissent from ever reaching their shores.

They're already barely talking to each other, so I figure that part wouldn't really change. What would change is that not as many provocations would be public, so you wouldn't have as much "wow, get a load of this guy" ventposting out there, attracting attention and potentially being seen by the user in question.

i've considered that it may be partly to prevent a degree of silencing - by posting YOUR opinion on YOUR blog, you cut people off from essentially silencing you via blocking you.

Maybe. If that's the case, then it's worth asking, why is that the default assumption?

I think going off to make your own post becomes a reasonable response if, for instance, you tried to engage and got shut down -- but people on Cohost seem to just do it preemptively.

Like I said, I think it goes back to that low-trust environment. You certainly don't see me making this whole argument in the comments of posts directly over there, and that's because I've learned that my comments tend to go ignored and people are generally uninterested in discussing this stuff with me. If commenting feels like talking to a wall, that doesn't inspire faith that I'm welcome to try again.

(I mean, I'll still do it sometimes, but I'm more uneasy about it, and I'm trying to mentally keep track of which users are unresponsive.)

I had a comment that got lost to the ether about a set of posts that I just realized were probably related to each other, where if I was right the interpretation by the second person seemed really wild, but I accidentally clicked somewhere and it got eaten. Oh well.

After following this whole discussion myself on Cohost, that general summary is probably applicable to several of these posts, though. Just a lot of talking past each other while seemingly having the same conversation, because of how vague some people were, and how that vagueness is ripe for misinterpretation.

FWIW, it was these two posts:

https://cohost.org/arachnixe/post/3444101-happy-birthday-to-th

https://cohost.org/NireBryce/post/3447822-when-someone-says-th

Just a lot of talking past each other while seemingly having the same conversation, because of how vague some people were, and how that vagueness is ripe for misinterpretation.

Yeah.

Looking at those two posts as examples: Nire Bryce's post does not have a link to where this supposed "organized campaign to pay people less" is coming from or any real indication of what's going on. If I just saw that post on its own, I would have been like, "...huh?"

The phrasing of an "organized campaign" seems to match Arachnixe's phrasing of "What's it going to take to make them care, a sustained campaign for people to cancel Cohost Plus?" -- so once I have that post in hand, I can make the connection.

However, once I have that post in hand I can also see that Arachnixe went on to say "Ha, I wish that stood a chance of going anywhere" -- so in context, it's clear that she's floating the idea as a sarcastic joke and not actually presenting that as a call to action. As such, characterizing this post as "when someone says there should be an organized campaign to pay people less" is like.... I see how you got there, I guess, but it strikes me as imprecise and potentially misleading. I mean, if I took Nire Bryce's post at face value, I would expect to see a post somewhere saying "there should be an organized campaign to pay people less!" and not "trying to organize a campaign to pay people less would be a wasted effort."

Anyway, phrasing that post in such vague and general terms makes it sound like an objection to the very concept of a boycott. It's one thing to say "a boycott isn't warranted here" or "a boycott wouldn't be effective in this case"; it's another thing to categorically cry foul "when someone says there should be an organized campaign to pay people less so they impliment the change you want."

Wow. Mad respect for the time and effort you put into organizing that wall of links. 🤯 👏 *hat tip*

I tried to play…I gave up after the first three and glanced at the last link. 😂 But I get what you mean about ppl not actually referencing what they’re rly bitching about and just…oof. Altho, two things jumped out at me, scrolling this time: 1) I find CH’s layout to be…uncomfortable on my eyes and wonder if others find the layout kinda jarring and 2) are “florps” rly a thing or did someone make that up??

Wow. Mad respect for the time and effort you put into organizing that wall of links.

Thank you! It certainly took some time and effort. In the process of putting the links in order, I started including timestamps as notes, with the intention to remove them later, but then I realized I might as well leave them in. I want people to be able to see that a lot of these posts were right on the heels of each other.

I tried to play…I gave up after the first three and glanced at the last link.

You now hold the first high score!

But I get what you mean about ppl not actually referencing what they’re rly *****ing about and just…oof.

For reference, I would prefer if you not use that word here.

I find CH’s layout to be…uncomfortable on my eyes and wonder if others find the layout kinda jarring

You want to know one of the worst parts?

If I use the control button and the plus button to try and zoom in, the post width tries to stay fixed, which means that the post shrinks.

are “florps” rly a thing or did someone make that up??

You're talking about "Likes are now florps?" ...? I think that was a joke hypothetical where a feature gets redubbed with a silly name, as an example of something goofy and pointless.

Np! I noticed that the time stamps seemed awfully close together, which also caught me off-guard.

*lol* High score—I’m wary of any prize. 😅

For reference, I would prefer if you not use that word here.

? All right. If I might ask, is it on this just post or on all your posts in general, and would it be just this word or all cursing/crass language?

That’s rly stunning about zoom just—being so broken. That’s epically bad. Esp for a site designed by ppl who are supposed to be good at this thing. :L

Yeah! And wowww, good to know that was just a one-off gripe by a user. X’D That would’ve been quite a thing to adjust to…! Florps. Wow.

*lol* High score—I’m wary of any prize.

Your prize is the burden of knowledge.

If I might ask, is it on this just post or on all your posts in general, and would it be just this word or all cursing/crass language?

This word on my posts or in reply to my comments. I do not have the same objection to cussing more generally.

That’s rly stunning about zoom just—being so broken. That’s epically bad. Esp for a site designed by ppl who are supposed to be good at this thing. :L

My guess is it's for aesthetic reasons, but it also means that for people with larger screens, there's a lot of wasted space. It just comes across like they didn't think about it.

‘Tis v heavy a burden indeed… 😔

Understood. I will endeavor to remember this for future interactions. 👍

Ohhh, the wasted space…! 😂 The moment you said that, it brought to mind tumblr’s initial Xitter-like UI overhaul from earlier this year and just how wiiiide things got, esp on wide displays. The screenshots were amazing. 👀

I clicked on three of them, and mostly felt like I was looking at parts of a conversation that I hadn't been following.

But the weirdest thing (something I hadn't expected to experience): it felt a bit like dipping into fandom battles on LiveJournal. References to posts I hadn't seen, anger, scoring points with humor that I didn't understand, and things like that.

But LiveJournal had a good threaded comment system - I think maybe it was the social dynamics (wanting to comment on something going on, but wanting to post for one's own followers rather than for the OP's readers) that made people start their own posts to discuss the same topic?

Anyway. Given your critique, I was very surprised that I reacted like that.

LJ at least has a followers-only setting on posts, doesn't it? I know Dreamwidth does.

Yes (or at least it did - that was around 20 years ago for me, and I've slept since then...).

Though I think it was friends-only, not followers-only (so people that you followed, rather than people who followed you - more like mutuals-only here). I guess that makes a difference - people with a lot of followers might only follow a handful of them in return, so for big-name fans, there was quite a difference in audience.

But despite the friends-only setting, a lot of people would comment in public about things that friends-of-friends-of-friends-of-friends were talking about. It was like... they wanted to make statements in public, but didn't want to be annoying in another person's space. (I also had a sense that it was rude to disagree or argue in the comments on a person's post - that a person's post was theirs, not for strangers to barge in on.) Or less generously, maybe people wanted to publicly rally their own troops for an argument, rather than making their case in enemy territory.

(I had one friend who did use the friends-only setting to comment on things, but she was hyper-aware of interpersonal dynamics, and used the friends-only setting to fret without engaging in Drama. Probably lots of other people used it that way, as well, but they weren't people who followed me.)

I guess that makes a difference - people with a lot of followers might only follow a handful of them in return, so for big-name fans, there was quite a difference in audience.

Speaking of which -- I'm reminded of AtomicThumbs' post about feeling unable to speak their mind on things without dragging more people into it. I thought that was sad to see.

But despite the friends-only setting, a lot of people would comment in public about things that friends-of-friends-of-friends-of-friends were talking about.

Sounds miserable.

Sounds miserable.

Oh, absolutely. Every time I've made an account on Tumblr, it has felt like those same dynamics existed, except were amplified by the way reblog-additions worked. But maybe I just didn't figure out how to follow the right circle of people. I don't know.

I was never on Livejournal, but reading this thread, as well as the other comments on this post, all I could think was "wow, this sounds exactly like tumblr." I'd always assumed that it was just because of the way reblog additions worked (combined perhaps with a lack of community features), but reading this, it does sound as if the social dynamics were perhaps also a carry-over from the culture on Livejournal. (iirc I do remember seeing something with an aside about Livejournal's features and social dynamics being sort of transitional between forums and modern tumblr culture, so that does make sense.)

I opened that first link and I must admit that I didn't know how we were going to get around to accessibility. I'm working in batches of five tabs, since I'm trying to be as nice to my browser as possible, and I feel like this isn't actually a conversation.

like, Cohost on its fucking foundation is a more accessible social media site than any other because it was inherently designed to avoid the harmful feedback loops other social media sites exploit. - breaking even is an accessibility feature.

I feel like "accessible" is floating around in terms of how people are using it. I think the original request was about Dark Mode from a photosensitive person. This comment sounds very disconnected from that.

in light of how palestinians are being brutalized i feel ashamed to write a long post about dark mode - source.

This feels like a bit of a potentially inflammatory thing to just toss in there. Like, multiple conversations can be had about multiple issues without making it seem like one issue needs to be addressed every single time.

Complete aside: I hate the ability for avatars/icons to move. Someone showing up in the comments has a spider wearing a birthday hat, and there's this slight back-and-forth movement from it.

and then I'm gonna stop talking about this, I prommy. - source.

...

... I feel like I'm being talked down to, like I'm a toddler or something, but I also have the distinct feeling that "prommy" is supposed to be a recognized, like, informal usage for the hypothetical audience.

After nearly an hour (and definitely skipping the comments sections on some of these posts), I can say: Rubbernecking Cohost disagreements/"discourse"/drama makes me feel like I don't think I can handle being on that site. A lot of those links seemed incomprehensible even going in with the knowledge that they were in relation to a given topic.

Choose Avatar

I opened that first link and I must admit that I didn't know how we were going to get around to accessibility. I'm working in batches of five tabs, since I'm trying to be as nice to my browser as possible, and I feel like this isn't actually a conversation.<blockquote>like, Cohost on its fucking foundation is a more accessible social media site than any other because it was inherently designed to avoid the harmful feedback loops other social media sites exploit. - <a href="https://cohost.org/hootOS/post/3447093-breaking-even-is-an">breaking even is an accessibility feature</a>.</blockquote>I feel like "accessible" is floating around in terms of how people are using it. I think the original request was about Dark Mode from a photosensitive person. This comment sounds very disconnected from that.<blockquote>in light of how palestinians are being brutalized i feel ashamed to write a long post about dark mode - <a href="https://cohost.org/vasovagirl/post/3457499-doomscrolling-dark-m">source</a>.</blockquote>This feels like a bit of a potentially inflammatory thing to just toss in there. Like, multiple conversations can be had about multiple issues without making it seem like one issue needs to be addressed every single time.Complete aside: I hate the ability for avatars/icons to move. Someone showing up in the comments has a spider wearing a birthday hat, and there's this slight back-and-forth movement from it.<blockquote>and then I'm gonna stop talking about this, I prommy. - <a href="https://cohost.org/ImplausiblyJosh/post/3465080-some-final-thoughts">source</a>.</blockquote>...... I feel like I'm being talked down to, like I'm a toddler or something, but I also have the distinct feeling that "prommy" is supposed to be a recognized, like, informal usage for the hypothetical audience.After nearly an hour (and definitely skipping the comments sections on some of these posts), I can say: Rubbernecking Cohost disagreements/"discourse"/drama makes me feel like I don't think I can handle being on that site. A lot of those links seemed incomprehensible even going in with the knowledge that they were in relation to a given topic.

I feel like this isn't actually a conversation.

Lol, that's one way to put it.

This comment sounds very disconnected from that.

Yeah that quote is one of the eyeroll-worthy ones, both because "designed to avoid harmful feedback loops" is not what "accessible" means, but also because Cohost is not even successful at that either.

Complete aside: I hate the ability for avatars/icons to move. Someone showing up in the comments has a spider wearing a birthday hat, and there's this slight back-and-forth movement from it.

Oh yeah for sure, it's annoying.

... I feel like I'm being talked down to, like I'm a toddler or something, but I also have the distinct feeling that "prommy" is supposed to be a recognized, like, informal usage for the hypothetical audience.

I think it's a reference to this Tumblr post, but that kind* of goofy talk seems common on Cohost and no matter how much exposure I've had to it I still find it grating.

*Not that word specifically, but just generally I guess. I don't know how to explain it.

I can't play the game because I made the mistake to start sampling posts before I got to that suggestion, and as a result I have already had enough. 😩

I find it fascinating that people have now compared this disjointed manner of discussion to both Tumblr and LiveJournal while I mostly associate it with Twitter. To be sure, I've seen some of it on Tumblr as well but never got the impression it was anywhere near as bad as on Twitter. I can also easily believe the claim about LJ even though I didn't witness much of it myself back in the day, because I am aware there was a whole dedicated "fandom wank" community.

To me, this is simply peak Twitter. People do it on Mastodon as well because obviously, habits from one website will carry over anytime a large amount of people move on to another. Is Cohost particularly bad though? Possibly! The impractical comment sections can't be helping matters.

I can't play the game because I made the mistake to start sampling posts before I got to that suggestion, and as a result I have already had enough.

Alas!

I find it fascinating that people have now compared this disjointed manner of discussion to both Tumblr and LiveJournal while I mostly associate it with Twitter.

Unfortunately, as you probably already know, people.

Unfortunately, as you probably already know, people.

That really sums it up. 😂 (ah, good old horse_ebooks)

yep I was gonna say this too—the tone and tempo of this discourse (not to mention the fact that a lot of these are short, microbloggy posts) seems very twitteresque. I would also point to the "criticizing me = you think I'm a bad person" feedback loop, although that's not just a twitter thing by any means.

Pingback: taking the Cohost demographics debate as another case study.

There are no reblogs for this post.

ArgentDandelion reblogged this post 3 months ago

DoktorHobo reblogged this post 3 months ago

There are no likes for this post.

lacroixboi liked this post 3 months ago

perfectnumber628 liked this post 3 months ago

Tentajack liked this post 3 months ago

IsisStormDragon liked this post 3 months ago

slowcooked liked this post 3 months ago

amewzing liked this post 3 months ago

pahein liked this post 3 months ago

Jak liked this post 3 months ago

swiftie liked this post 3 months ago

DoktorHobo liked this post 3 months ago

anacedragon liked this post 3 months ago

CuriouslyOminousRazzlingDazzle liked this post 3 months ago

killingthesun liked this post 3 months ago

mastermarz liked this post 3 months ago

Flag a Post

When do you want to publish this post?