> And why would that be a problem?
I'm referring to the journey that will move people away from "Platform A" again because of Platform B. That's a problem to solve because the value of the social network to an individual is largely the PEOPLE on that network.
> It would not, because it would not be run by a commercial organization.
Agree, taking "platform A" out of the profit-wheel could help. But still in a normal adoption scheme you need to make it worthwhile for a critical mass of people to use it for OTHER people to also consider it.
In the end I believe you will need another external driver to solve this (i.e. restricting for-profit social media), because that other platform "has all the people and the dopamine".
-
There is a more simple parallel situation one can observe: People trying to move from WhatsApp/FB-messenger/.. to i.e. Signal.
It's JUST about direct messaging, but anecdotally the majority of these transitions fail to complete because not all involved are actually on-board to abandon the old Messenger.
So you succeed and your close group installs Signal and starts to use it with you, but each one is also part of other groups who are still also on the legacy app. Everyone has both apps installed, but slowly communication starts to move back to the legacy app because it's the "superset" of all friend-groups.