The most vocal and obnoxious of the Bluesky userbase get antagonized by pretty much anything. Pleasing that lot is a fruitless task.

What Bluesky should do now is focus on expanding their userbase away from this particular group of insufferables.

▲

CactusBlue an hour ago | parent | next [-]

As a startup founder, your userbase is your god. Either treat them with utmost respect, or learn to explicitly fire your customers.

▲

yuestion an hour ago | parent | next [-]

If they want to remain a niche echo-chamber platform rather than become a major social network, that would be an appropriate strategy. However, I expect they have higher ambitions.

What they should also do is redesign (or remove) the "nuclear block" feature. In its current state, it helps perpetuate a hostile and exclusionary atmosphere to new users, which isn't going to help Bluesky grow an active and diverse userbase.

▲

jauntywundrkind an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

You have more than one user base.

You have to make hard product decisions about which user bases to serve.

▲

CactusBlue an hour ago | parent [-]

Then explicitly refuse service, instead of mocking your userbase.

	▲	pfraze an hour ago \| parent [-]
		By... banning them? What are you suggesting?

▲

marxisttemp an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

They should focus on implementing ActivityPub instead of their useless proprietary protocol

	▲	danabramov an hour ago \| parent \| next [-]
		It's not "proprietary", it's openly specified and is literally being taken to IETF: https://docs.bsky.app/blog/taking-at-to-ietf Also, unlike ActivityPub, it's actually useful for building features that normal people expect from social apps — for example, algorithmic feeds and search, and a single interlinked world (rather than fragmented "servers").
	▲	CactusBlue an hour ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Eh, AP has its own sets of problems (underspecified protocol, split-brained on discoverability, new developments are met with hostility in the community)