Am I making sense with that?

Example– a very popular founder and content-creator upon multiple history subs recently retired. Now, I’ve tried to create at least a slow trickle of content with their departure (!historyart@piefed.social is one of the places), but a couple weeks ago someone made a comment that they missed the old days of ~10 new posts a day. Fair! Then I reminded them that there’s 2,000+ posts already made in that community, and whenever they wanted to enjoy more content by the founder, well… it was just sitting there waiting for them.

*crickets*

TBH, that also seems to be the case with my own community. We’re coming up on 700 posts now across 3+yrs, and I’ve put considerable work in to most of those posts, trying to make them mini-articles/editorials as often as possible, but it’s the same thing… very few people want to look through the older content. It’s like everything has to live and die on the stream, so to speak.

I mean-- is automated-posting and doomscrolling just the way it is, these days? And if so, does that have something to do with most people now browsing the Fediverse by mobile, instead of desktop?

Thanks for your opinions on this stuff. I’m honestly kinda baffled…

  • papalonian@lemmy.world
    91·
    10 hours ago

    they missed the old days of ~10 new posts a day.

    why don’t they just go look back through it for their enjoyment?

    I don’t see how you’ve drawn the conclusion that people haven’t already done this, and want new content to go through. The fediverse is small enough that you can usually comb through an entire community’s backlog in a couple days, if not hours. When the backlog is empty, they’re going to wish they had more content.

    It’s like recommending someone just go watch the older seasons of a long running show they liked that ended, sure there’s probably a number of people that haven’t seen the first season or two but a lot of people have already seen it and watching the same show on repeat is not the same as a new episode every week.

    • JohnnyEnzyme@piefed.socialOPEnglish
      34·
      7 hours ago

      EDIT
      No, I’m the one who’s wrong.

      You seem to be drastically missing the point, if that’s your current conclusion.

      Let’s see if I can figure out things?

      • papalonian@lemmy.world
        2·
        9 hours ago

        Ok, thanks for clarifying I guess?

        If I’m being honest my real conclusion was “OP seems real whiny about people wanting more content outside of what they’ve been posting”, especially with the “I ‘reminded’ them about the 2000+ posts” remark, but I wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt.