Post

Ironically, the level of vitriol in response to @jemima.bsky.social's column on the echoey nature of the BlueSky chamber has matched any twitter pile on I've ever seen, only with an added dose of self-righteousness. (1/11)

If you search "Jemima" on here you can see hordes of people screaming that she's a Nazi, and even some trying to carry out amateur genealogy on her family tree, all for saying that their preferred social media platform isn't a perfect utopia. Wild! (2/11)

The strangest thing is that people seem to be angry about several things she didn't argue: 1. That Nazis should be allowed on BlueSky 2. That X remains better than Bluesky (3/11)

I don't think #1 really needs explaining, but on #2: she actually concluded that a theoretical digital town square (which no longer exists precisely because of Elon) would be preferable to all these little walled gardens. Maybe this should’ve been more explicit given widespread confusion! (4/11)

A big irony here is that Elon and his minions have actually dunked on Jemima for a past column (presciently!) saying that he has turned twitter into a dying platform! (5/11)

Americans are also reading a British columnists in a British newspaper, laughing at her silly British name, howling they don't get her British references & missing the British context (Bsky migration post-Elon UK riot tweets) V reminiscent of this lol 👇🏻(6/11) www.gawkerarchives.com/culture/i-sh...

I'm one of those Brits that has moved across in earnest in the past six weeks. It's nice over here, I wish it had more people who engage with financial journalism, but hopefully that will come. But Jemima has a point on the echo chamber, particularly i/r/t the glorification of block lists. (7/11)

I saw someone last night accuse Jemima of being a "crypto booster". This seemed odd given how lots of the crypto community despise her for critical columns, such as the one screenshotted below. I then realised that people had erroneously labelled her a crypto promoter in various block lists (8/11)

It's great to have tools to better block abusive folk and this is obviously developing in response to what a cesspit Elon's X has become. But if you're blocking people not even for what they believe, but what you mistakenly think they believe, then that's not great! (9/11)

Above all, Jemima's politics aren't easy to categorise. She's probably left of some of her critics on many issues, thought not on others. If you're trying to infer a British person's beliefs from a photo from a reporting trip to Mar-a-Lago you're doing it wrong. (10/11)

For a platform whose dedicated users like to promote this as a civilised alternative to The Other Place (or sometimes more cringely The Bad Place) the rage all seems a bit, well, uncivil. Anyway, I look forward to the Montagnard Convention putting my name on various blocklists now I guess! (11/11)

Demanding civility without any moral principles is what people are objecting to here. This is a place for people who care about human rights more than about people swearing.

Or maybe people are actually just upset that this place is being described as more biased than the site run by a literal fascist who has banned people from using progressive terminology.

Although probably not as daft as framing your criticism of an echo chamber around your own incredibly niche and privileged social circle.

? Is this about the Stoke Newington reference? London has a population of 9 million people and the FT is a British newspaper. Maybe a little "metropolitan elite" (as us Brits like to complain about London-centric myopia) but "incredibly niche" is a push.

Oddly enough it's not the knowing that London or Stoke Newington exist that's the niche part. How many of the 9m people in this city do you think identify with posh dinner parties full of journos?