You can barely select text on a post. If you click on it, you lost your place and go inside the post?
Why aren't comment GUIs like those of HN, lobsters or the old reddit-style not more popular?
I think I understand why YouTube, Facebook and Twitter intentionally cripple usability by only allowing 1 level of replies and (ab)using the @username way to discuss things - to cater to stupider people with less attention span, to keep discussions lighter and broader and to show more of the top level comments. But all of these would've been accomplished if there were more "show more" buttons, like new reddit does it. It's still dumb as hell but at least it keeps the discussion threaded/nested.
Off topic, but I just realized when I collapse something on HN, it sends a request to HN telling it it's collapsed. Useful for when reloading a page, but I would love a setting that makes the collapse client-only with no requests (and maybe no persistence on reloading).
Anyway, I never used any social media, including Twitter, save for the occasional link I found that I use Nitter or XCancel for. I was really hoping to finally participate in the new fediverse but when I saw the UI decisions, I don't see a point. Twitter clones and alternatives can still be Twitter-like without the dumbing down of the threading/nesting of the comment sections.
Edit: Forgot to mention both Bluesky and Mastodon load much slower than HN or Lobsters or reddit with or without Tor.
Thank you Adële.
Note to myself: stop commenting and update your damn gemini capsule
Despite requiring Javascript execution mastodon actually does have the post contents of a URL in the hidden meta-content HTML header on the page where it scolds you and blocks you for not executing their arbitrary code. All they'd have to do is put that same text in the HTML as actual <p> text. And it's not just mastodon instances, the other fediverse "applications' are just as silly in their intentional breaking of accessibility for no reason.
Fact is, if you are launching a social network which is not accessible from the get go, you are part of the problem. You have no moral high ground, you're just playing around and widening the digital divide, leaving people behind.
I like the project though, it'd be cool to have a picture of what it looks like either on the git page or the blog article but I like the spirit of the project.
Second, it's kind of depressing that this is still tying itself to web technologies. What about a straightforward desktop client that uses a native desktop toolkit? I get that this is a difficult problem because a lot of protocols bake in reliance on web technologies and whatnot, but if I am looking for a simple graphical client I would expect something that aims to not simply dump content into webviews, nevermind still being dependent on an actual browser!