https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_effect
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coordination_game
https://fs.blog/coordination-problems/
Individual action can't solve problems effectively when the cost of changing behavior is too high when others don't follow immediately. Many public figures started their mastodon/bluesky/threads accounts but came back to Twitter when they didn't get following there.
Of course it can. Just publish posts on two platforms simultaneously. Or even delay the Twitter post.
Cory Doctorow
Mastodon: @pluralistic@mamot.fr 909 Following, 54K Followers
Twitter: @doctorow, 2,814 Following, 494.4K Followers
There are lots of inactive accounts.
Because that's where the journalists hang out. If you want journalists to see and report on your words and activities you have to be where they are, since they are far too lazy to go out and find you.
They may have sworn off posting to Twitter, but I bet you most of them are on Twitter every single day looking for 'stories'
So it must all just be a fever dream. Who could possibly ignore the red flags you personally don't like, completely inexplicable.
People who don't like Zuckerberg: It's an alternative social network to the Zucks
Network Effects as other have said, but it's a certain type of network now.
It was likely an unusual activity automated trigger. Her account is reactivated. No need for the hysterics.
Network effects means that if you go elsewhere you won’t get the eyeballs and serendipitous discovery to the degree you get on X, for example.
To put it differently, people on social media seek exposure and attention and X is a way to maximize your exposure.