Popular Mechanics! Achievement unlocked.
What the other places are doing to remain Reddit "clones", rather than "alternatives", is they refuse to change the basic mechanics. Most sites being advocated are just reskinns of the Reddit backbone. They still the same downvote and upvote system and the same subreddit system, except that they are renammed to something different. They still have a front page that looks different, but still gets its content by ranking posts by the net number of upvotes, which degrade over a number of hours. They still have a system that lets you join groups of similar interests, but it controlled by who creates the group first. They still follow the same basic formula that Reddit uses, but just change how it looks and what it's called. In some cases, just a simple rebranding, with the addition of a few improvements, is enough to take the userbase of a different site. After all, Reddit is very similar to Digg, before it changed. However, when a problem exists in the foundation of a website, it's impossible to solve it by building a new house on top of it. Voat still allows moderators, which means it's still possible to have someone ban content that they don't like. Empeopled is still using a system that allows people to upvote what they like, and downvote things that they don't agree with, meaning that shitposts are still going to hit the front page, and will even pay the posters when they do. As long as there is a crack in the foundation, water is still going to get in. What Hubski does is retains the strong points of Reddit, while changing the things that don't work. There's no moderators that can silence opinions that they don't like. There's no upvotes to reward people that spout popular opinions. There's no downvotes to punish people for going against the grain. There's no karma system that gives the upvotes and downvotes weight. Hubski still has the ability to track and rank the popularity of a post, but the success of a post doesn't really change the track record of a user in a way that would commend circle jerking and discourage discourse. These other sites are refusing to offer enough of a change that would make them more appealing than Reddit. At the end of the day, they just wind up being Reddits, but with less content and comment, which drives people right back to Reddit.
I get the impression that some people basically do want a copy of reddit, just one that hasn't yet reached the critical mass where it's too hard to see through the shitposting to the substantial discussion. I don't know if they realize this is a temporary state, or maybe they think they can keep it from happening if they get in as one of the vanguard.
For the most part I only see two ways to avoid Eternal September: 1) Stay small and/or incredibly focused. This is effectively security through anonymity, but having a strong central theme with good moderation can stave off the seemingly endless shitposting. 2) Flee the sinking ship. Once a site starts to go downhill, there's really very little chance of it truly recovering. The people running the show either think it's a good thing (Yay, more traffic!) or they're asleep at the wheel, which should shake your confidence.
As long as a site stays pretty strong when it comes to shitposting, it should be fine. When looking at the defaults, there's a lot of shitposting in subs like /r/funny and /r/askreddit, but if you go somewhere heavily moderated like /r/science or /r/askhistorians, the discussion is pretty stellar. The key to keeping good discussion flowing is heavy moderation. If a site stays too loose, then the whole thing keeps getting filled with people posting the same things over and over again. However, with the right amount, it's possible to create a site that retains good discussion without getting too overzealous with moderation. If it lets people moderate themselves, it works pretty well, until the shitposting gets too much to filter out on a user to user basis. At the same time, if a site doesn't reward people for regurgitating popular talking points and punish people for giving dissenting opinions, then it fares a lot better. 4chan is full of shitposts, but simultaneously has good points being brought up, regardless of the consensus (exceptions: /b/ and /v/). There is no upvote to push things to the top, nor is there a downvote that hides things to most users - it's all equal through the eyes of the ranking algorithm. Also, there's a lack of point tracking system that pats people on the back for contributing towards the hivemind.
I'll come back later to properly reply to these posts, if I think of a good point, but for now I wanted to point this out. On the chans, there is a vague analogue to voting in that, if you reply to a thread, it bumps it to the top as usual, but you can sage to reply without bumping. In this way, channers can flame a shit thread without giving it the bump it doesn't deserve. It's not really the same, though, not the way it is on reddit, where you can actively suppress content with voting.
I'll be honest, it's the only section I read. I thought he seemed to really get what we are trying to accomplish.
I think voat is just too much of a clone, too prone to the same problems. Only time will tell if it works better, but at least hubski isn't just a straight clone.
Take a look at Voat right now, all the old users of Voat are complaining about the new influx of Reddit users flooding the site with memes and stuff. It's quite interesting to watch. Voat will probably "win", but honestly, they are winning the "who hosts the memes and annoying people" competition. Congrats.
Well, if our hypothesis is "most people are idiots" then the GCF of humans might very well be "is an idiot." If that's the case then appealing to the largest number of people would seem to imply that you appeal to idiots, whereas anywhere that deters idiots will thereby deter humanity's GCF, and yield lower rates of adoption. I built some "ifs" and "perhapses" into this, but I stand by my analysis.
Voat is turning into a front end aggregator of Imgur and other image board files that are all in a directory structure (subverses). I was kinda hoping Voat would gain some momentum and be the reddit of 6-7 years ago but honestly, Hubski fits that bill better.
Before the recent turmoil I bet Voat was fairly similar to Reddit back in the day. It was a small, community that the cat hadn't let out of the bag yet. Unfortunately large influxes of new users, especially in an exodus like this one, will force a site towards the lowest common denominator.
Voat was more or less already given the template of being a close reddit mirror quite early on, just with different community policing strategy. Interestingly even Voat users are trying to move away from Imgur, being wary of the Imgur admin's similar (not quite identical) takedown policies.
I think it's interesting that there's a lot of coverage over people leaving reddit because of censorship, and little coverage (that I've seen) of people leaving reddit because they are becoming increasingly aware of how much hate content it (still) hosts. I guess the second camp is perhaps less vocal.
I think a good number of people on Reddit don't really take it seriously. They're just there to waste time and nothing more. To them, the drama that goes on really doesn't mean much to them. Also some people just go to Reddit for the niche subreddits because Reddit is one of the few places on the Internet where you can have a thousand people or so that are interested in something quirky like abandoned buildings. That subreddit has over 270,000 subscribers. Where else can you find a community that big to talk about abandoned buildings or anything else like that?
The later is what has turned me off of Reddit. It is infested with racists and misogynists.
Take a look at Voat right now, all the old users of Voat are complaining about the new influx of Reddit users flooding the site with memes and stuff. It's quite interesting to watch.
Between hubski and voat I have found voat to be such an identical clone of reddit complete with meaningless ball-busting comments while hubski actually provides an alternative. It's not the same and it incorporates the coolest features of multiple social media like hashtags.
Feature Request: Give me btc when I get circledots.
Yea, fuck this place! I quit my job and I'm gonna start posting on Empeople!
I stuck around due to the opposite impression. Voat.co is the reddit clone, Snapzu is interesting in the way they are almost copying Hubski and the chan boards are their own little universe. Will be interesting to see if a critical mass of reddit people scatter about.
I go the Voat when I crave something like Reddit, I go to Hubski when I crave something different. Simple as that.
When I first saw Hubski, it didn't really remind me of reddit at all. It looked like another site as it didn't try to copy the subreddit formula. Also when I first looked at the content that was being submitted, I could quickly tell there was a more serious tone to Hubski.
booyah! Well done all!With its clean design, mix of Twitter-like and Reddit-like features, and a general disinterest in becoming a hive of scum and villainy, Hubski seems like a fairly interesting alternative to Reddit should it build a sizable userbase and manage to keep the site up in the meantime.
I find Aether's use of peer-to-peer network very interesting, not so much for the anonymity but rather for the non-reliance on servers; which I guess are the most expensive part of running a site like this. Like Tor, it looks like the anonymity thing will lead to a focus on unsavoury stuff. Maybe one day, when peer-to-peer works better and faster, sites like this will not have to pay for servers anymore. That would be cool.
Definitely good to read a fair review of what this site is all about. I have been recommending it to a lot of friend even those who weren't into Reddit. Sometimes you felt a little weird recommending Reddit because of its toxicity, but Hubski is a very easy recommendation for anyone looking for interesting reads, and discussions.
On the other hand it seems like the author gave a very superficial look at the other alternatives. For instance, nothing about Snapzu's gamification or tribe system was mentioned in the article. And he's painted the others in quite a negative light.Definitely good to read a fair review of what this site is all about.
If I had to guess why I would maybe say that Hubski is really quick to teach you about its mechanics. I knew what I was doing after 10 minutes of actually being a part of the site. The other sites or at least the ones I tried weren't as quick to educate the user. Granted it doesn't take away from the fact the writer did a poor job reviewing the other sites, it just also means he/she may havr done a shallow job.
(•_•) ( •_•)>⌐■-■ (⌐■_■) (☞⌐■_■)☞If I could hug you right now, I'd never let go
-PancakeSmuggler
The folks in /r/KotakuInAction, /r/TheRedPill, and /r/Coontown can all stay where they are.
That's kind of the idea behind web of trust models of things. I kind of wish the moderation could be slightly altered to go that route. Communities or webs of people would be formed and they wouldn't know the other groups even really existed unless they hit "global" or sought it out. It's quite a fascinating model to study. Hubski is sort of a simpler version of something like that.
The article implies Aether is destined to become /b/ due to its anonymity. Although I'm not familiar with the Aether community, I think this view overlooks so some of the complexities of "anonymity", and also the influence of convention and expectations of a community. Aether calls itself anonymous; this is true in the sense that it obscures to some degree the slave name of its users (I don't know the technical details, but I guarantee you if Big Brother really wanted to know who you are, he could find you). However as far as anonymity affects behavior (e.g. on 4chan), I think it's much more important that communication is "one-shot" (by thread if not by post), there are no reputations, and you can't get to know anyone - and in this sense Aether is pseudonymous, since it encourages post-signing. The other factor is expectations: /b/ is anonymous, but so are /v/, /a/, etc; there are trash heaps, but there are also recycling bins and maybe even some compost piles to be found. The reputation of an online community is extremely self-perpetuating, and as long as people don't come to Aether expecting it to be the new /b/, it's not going to become the new /b/.
> But perhaps best of all, there's actually a feature to mute other accounts and ban them from commenting on your threads. Maybe to a redditor that sounds like a killer feature, but I've never actually had a reason to use that here. Our content quality ranges from great to trying; there's nobody trying to set negative karma records.
I was prepared to be annoyed at that article. I'm happy to see Hubski got the review it deserves, the article seemed to have pretty accurately describe the whole point of the site. Reddit "clones" will not go far because everyone will just go back to Reddit. While there are opportunities for actual discussion there, the fact that you need an actual serious tag on your posts to assure it doesn't get shit on with jokes is pretty telling. I see Hubski growing a great deal in the near future.
Hey that's awesome! Are y'all ready for growth?
The page is down - I think we hugged (hubbed?) it to death! another achievement unlocked...?