There’s really no reason to bother with social networks owned by literal far right supporters
I generally agree but I'm still frequently linked to X and I'm either unable to view the content because I don't have an account or I don't click because I don't want to visit the site. These services allow me to access the user content without having to go through X, itself. I wish hackers/the tech industry moved off of X like most users but here we are.
I've reached the point where I go "If it's on Twitter I don't need to know". We'll all reach that point eventually.
It's not the fault of the users when there's no viable alternative<p>Bluesky is founded by the same founders of Twitter and is not open and has ridiculous policies, Mastodon is the same, even less popular and even more tyrannical<p>So the choice for most users, including myself, is tightly moderated spaces run by awful people, or a website run by a literal Nazi, but that at least doesn't ban me on sight<p>The Musk twitter acquisition (and the sieg heil at the inauguration) were pivotal moments where a good alternative could've surfaced but instead we got twitter 2.0 (and moving from Twitter to Twitter 2 seems entirely pointless even if it wasn't badly moderated on top of that)
Mastodon doesn't have policies. Every instance has their own policies. That's the strength of mastodon.
Gargron, Apple, Google, all has/had policies for Mastodon, which were incompatible with more than 2/3 of its users(at peak).
IMO the reason why BS just ended up being Twitter 2.0, or 1.2 even, or why Twitter went down its path in the first place, is that the US and EU are no longer producing enough content to justify ownership or continuous iterations of such a system.<p>Otherwise it wouldn't have been forced upon who begrudgingly got funding secured. Any of then-GAFA could have bought it and none wanted to touch it.<p>The bad moderation on those platforms, I think, is a desperate attempt to align platform cultures to the moderating entities' standards that are no longer comprehensible to users, if known at all, like a kid on a push car moving away from the park trying to steer it back.<p>It seemed fine until 2015 or so, streaming hundreds of novel tweets per second per user, many with novel images. Then things went downhill. Musk can't be the sole villain in it.
> Bluesky is founded by the same founders of Twitter and is not open and has ridiculous policies<p>Huh? It is remarkably open and the policies are not really an issue.
Bluesky has the same moderation issues as Twitter. There are people complaining their recommendation feeds are full of macho men nudity and/or furry images, or flooded by far left infights(not like relative to self-proclaimed centrism but FAR left), or straight up getting banned after they've specifically chosen the most appropriate contents, things like that.<p>Weird thing is that my feed is largely fine other than those gotten banned went back to Twitter. Only politics topics I get are neutral, concerns in global economy, some US and more often Ukraine. No dick pics or furries or antisemetism, just cats, more cats, food pics, infosec stuffs, all as I were back on Twitter in 2009 or so.<p>But there are enough reports of negative experience, so moderatuon is likely still a bit problematic. Or that compounding with lack of passionate users.
I've gotten banned from Blue Sky for absolutely no discernible reason, and the main feeds are basically centrist slop
>I generally agree but I'm still frequently linked to X...<p>... so? Being linked to it is not an obligation to bother with it, neither is FOMO.
Not a very helpful comment for someone not in the know. I couldn't find anything political on their landing page.
<a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/elon-musk/elon-musk-boosting-far-right-politics-globe-rcna189505" rel="nofollow">https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/elon-musk/elon-musk-boosting-fa...</a><p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_activities_of_Elon_Musk" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_activities_of_Elon_M...</a><p><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2026/10/17/opinion/elon-musk-republican-politics.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.nytimes.com/2026/10/17/opinion/elon-musk-republi...</a><p><a href="https://ecfr.eu/article/musks-war-on-european-democracy-how-to-open-up-x-and-fight-back/" rel="nofollow">https://ecfr.eu/article/musks-war-on-european-democracy-how-...</a><p><a href="https://apnews.com/article/elon-musk-x-influence-uk-us-politics-48cc1870cbdb5df03829f5ab303b579d" rel="nofollow">https://apnews.com/article/elon-musk-x-influence-uk-us-polit...</a><p>Hope that helps.
This tool is for accessing Twitter/X, owned by Elon Musk, a far right billionaire.
When you go far left, everything looks far right.<p>Seriously, we have a problem labeling anything not left “far right”. It is of course by design and has always been (who is not with us is against us). Not that right is any better, but at list they don’t label everyone across “antifa” or whatever.<p>That said, i do not endorse Musk, especially his infamous gesture.
You don't need to go anywhere to see that Musk is far right. If you're going to claim otherwise, you're gonna need to bring some solid evidence.<p>The "left" spans such a huge range right now that to be "not left" is basically far right. A Republican opposing Trump is _extremely_ rare (and usually excommunicates them from the party) while on the left, you have AOC, Omar, etc actively sharing a party with Fetterman and Manchin. Right/far-right was a thing in the 2010's but not any more.
Is there a list of things or beliefs that make someone "Far right"? Is there a list or reason why being labeled "far right" (by others, not oneself) should be disqualifying, or worthy of having your services abused? Nitter and its forks are in violation of the X.com terms of service, which is why they are facing legal challenges. Those challenges may be easily routed around with other technology, but Nitter and its forks are still violating the services brazenly. Are "far right" people beneath the law? Is it okay to steal from someone on the "far right"? Is it okay to commit violence against someone on the "far right"?
Ah yes, you only need to set the label, those who disagree need to prove the negative. Pretty typical.<p>What is “far right”, btw? What are objective measurable criteria?<p>> The "left" spans such a huge range right now that to be "not left" is basically far right<p>Jesus Christ, you can’t be serious. But then again, I am not surprised that you are.
The right spans such a huge range right now that not to be right is to be "far-left". A "democrat" opposing the OmniCause ("climate, migration and 'palestine'") is _extremely_ rare and usually gets excommunicated from the Party, e.g. Fetterman and Manchin (whom you for some reason listed as 'democrats' even though the Party does its best to label and shun them) while on the right you have people ranging from Massey to Trump, Vance to Rubio, Wiles to Collins.<p>So maybe it is in the eye of the beholder? I certainly see far more labelling coming from the "left" side of the spectrum than from the "right" side although they're certainly catching up lately now that the communist zombie has risen from its grave again. On the "right" the general idea of the "left" seems to be that they're 'stupid', 'naive' and 'uninformed' while on the "left" the general idea of the "right" seems to be that they're 'evil', 'narrow-minded', 'racist' and '*-phobe'. Neither of these general ideas are true but that doesn't seem to bother anyone.
Er, Musk did a Nazi salute and publicly supported the AfD in Germany.<p>What else do you need to agree that he is far right? Wear an SS outfit? Put some people in ovens?
Ah, AfD, the party with female lesbians leader, right? typical far right, point taken.<p>Otherwise, yes, I think labeling any party which works within the legal bounds as “far” is dangerous. Because there are legit far groups which should not be permitted on both sides of the spectrum. And we better know what is legitimate and what not.
It's just a gorgeous free lunch tavern if you didn't even understand English through LLM and American right wing politics was just the cash pile for patrons to shovel into the fireplace.<p>There's some likely made up charts online[1] for country stats of Twitter right now, and Twitter is allegedly 2.5x more popular than it is in the US in the top two countries, which are incidentally known for strong-ish purchasing power and near-nonexistent English literacy.<p>Musk's ongoing massive self humiliation is largely contained to the US/English speaking space. Other parts of the world with no strong cultural understandings and pathways from the US and its politics, which is quite substantial still, are fine, ish. Things like LLM auto translation haven't made a change to that situation; it only strengthened the reverse of that pathway.<p>1: <a href="https://soax.com/research/twitter-active-users" rel="nofollow">https://soax.com/research/twitter-active-users</a>
If you think Musk is far right you will have a really bad time in coming years.
Musk holds very few far right views in comparison to parties very close to power in many EU countries for example.<p>He is against mass immigration, especially from Islamic countries. That is a very mainstream view though. There is nothing 'far' about it.
His nazi salute looked pretty far up and to the right. Twice, btw.
Everyone is against "mass" immigration as in "let's go to country X and gather a million people and bring them to country Y", that's not controversial
[dead]
In the same vein there is no reason to bother with social networks owned by <i>literal far left supporters</i>, i.e. nearly all the others. Combined these two statements lead to the conclusion that hardly any social networks are worth bothering which is something I can get behind.
Of course there is, don't be silly. There's also no alternative at the moment, or for the foreseeable future. Sure, there's some knockoffs that try hard, but they're still jokes.
Except when tons of gov owned services (police, firemen, emergency services) are using it to communicate with citizens...
You are the reason Bioware is now dead and scattered to the winds.
What if i am part of the far right?
For someone who's been on Twitter for a long time, these alternatives function as a good off-ramp that's easier than quitting entirely and abruptly. I deleted my account a few years ago knowing I'd still be able to see some of the content without viewing their ads or contributing my own content.
[flagged]