[yuestion]

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.

[subscribed]

What do you compare this userbase to? Twitter? Facebook? Reddit? HN? All of these places have similar or worse userbase and worse filtering/blocking options than bsky.

[CactusBlue]

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

[yuestion]

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]

You have more than one user base.

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

[CactusBlue]

Then explicitly refuse service, instead of mocking your userbase.

[pfraze]

By... banning them? What are you suggesting?

[marxisttemp]

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

[danabramov]

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]

Eh, AP has its own sets of problems (underspecified protocol, split-brained on discoverability, new developments are met with hostility in the community)