I would caution some patience and suspicion on this story.

• Zillow says that the sale information was a mistake and has since been removed.

• Meanwhile, this headline is sourced from a straight-up clickbait site reposting a story from a news website with a history of mixed factual reporting.

We all get the fun brain chemicals coming out when a big juicy story like this appears and validates our worldviews and we can't wait to share and amplify it, but spreading misinformation is bad, m'kay?

I'm just grateful to see that just when folks were beginning to doubt if Lemmy could actually serve as a Reddit alternative, we've been able to prove that we're equally if not more adept at insular slapfighting over petty bullshit and assuming the worst about others' intentions.

I cannot believe that there are companies and non-wingnuts who are still actively using that site at this point. Like maybe at the start it was ha-ha funny watching him flail about with code printouts and unplugging random microservices leading to outages, but I feel like the moment he started actively funneling money to alt-right knuckleheads and human traffickers should have been enough of a kick in the pants for even folks heavily reliant on the platform to make their exit.

I see we've unfortunately brought over the trend of defaulting to assuming the worst intentions from Reddit, with a side portion of baseless accusations. While I'm disappointed that the community was removed, I think it can be easily explained by:

• Speed Run the Content Moderation Learning Curve
• The reality that, right or wrong, any significant legal action brought against them would be game over for the instance and personally devastating for the humans involved. Conde Nast they are not, and if Joe SIIA decides to put them in their crosshairs, the legal situation would be financially devastating.

It's reaaaaaally really easy to sit in the peanut gallery and talk shit about how they're cowardly acquiescing when it's not our neck in the noose.

That being said, I feel like recent acts of defederation are only serving to highlight that the way forward in the fediverse is going to be having accounts on multiple instances in order to get the full breadth of offerings. In my case:

• I initially signed up on lemmy.ml since that was, at the time the "main" instance.
• Oh hey, kbin looks cool. I'll sign up there and check it out.
• Oh hey, people are saying that the lemmy.ml admins are evil commies or some shit. Welp I better make an account on lemmy.world in case anything goes sideways.
• Oh hey, now I'm probably going to also need an account on dbzer0 as well, dope.

This is my issue with the article.

Headline: Here's what we know about EG.5 so far

Body: Apparently not much. We uhh, know the name of it? Severity, how contagious it may be, symptoms, breakthrough rate...like umm, anything??

I mean I do analytics on site engagement metrics professionally, like as my job that pays me money, and based on that and past instances of r/place, I can make an educated guess that:

• They were desperate to improve July usage numbers because projections were looking shitty after the events of the past month.

• r/place has traditionally been a good way to juice engagement numbers

• They pulled a lever they knew would generate the results they needed

Is it temporary? Sure. But this buys them some time and August's numbers are August's problem.

Here's are the stats from a previous instance of r/place:

Social platform Reddit re-introduced its collaborative social experiment r/Place on April 1, leading to the highest daily active users (DAUs) its mobile app has ever seen

So yeah, they'll get the juice they need, probably, but the fact that they were compelled to even need to pull that lever says a lot, imo.

I don't think there's going to be a good way to know. Semrush is showing a relatively steady decline since January 2023, but I don't trust third-party tools for that. And I doubt that Reddit would make its first-party analytic data public if it looks bad, so in that case the default move is to either cherrypick or create a metric that appears favorable, a la Elon Musk's brand new Twitter metric of median picoseconds of verified user screen time per albatross fart or whatever.

From a qualitative standpoint, both the content and general vibe seem markedly worse than a month or two ago. It's made it easy to stop using it as my default online platform.

But in any case, I don't think it's worth it to get too invested in either its success or failure.

I think we can tag in the Paradox of Tolerance with a side of Nazi Bar on this one.

This type of "they're intolerant, but polite" shit needs to get nipped in the bud because it metastasizes quickly, and sends out a batsignal to other intolerant groups that this will make a fine home base so long as they hide their power levels.

Thank you for posting this. I was beginning to become concerned that I'd need to visit Reddit for my fill of disingenuous whataboutism, but this gives me hope that we can cultivate a culture of bad-faith posting right here in the fediverse.

Spam bots pursuing an audience shouldn't be a surprising thing. Even glorious fediverse valhalla is battling with them.

The difference between the Threads & Twitter situations is that I'm inclined to extend a lot more leeway to an engineering team that's less than two weeks into a new platform, versus one that's been around nearly two decades and is suddenly dealing with issues because the owner decided to haphazardly fire the teams responsible for maintaining those areas.

For reference, that's 31.5% of all House Republicans. Another way to see it is that 68.5% of House Republicans, which are generally the most extreme breed of Republican, are supportive of US military aid to Ukraine. I'm pleasantly surprised to find support for Ukraine remaining that high.

• Time to first response
• Resolution time
• Customer support costs

It's key to note that customer satisfaction with response is not among the metrics the CEO is highlighting. It seems that the role of customer support is increasingly to frustrate customers away from pursuing issues, rather than reaching a mutually-satisfying resolution. I consider most customer support chatbots as a tactic towards that: they're not going to offer any significant assistance and exist simply to waste my time, so of course the imaginary "time to resolution" is going to be minimal. If they're going to make it a hassle then I'll just open up a credit card dispute.