The breakup analogy falls short for numerous reasons, primarily because we are talking about communities rather than individuals.
More like a divorce with kids involved than a simple breakup. Some people are happy to divorce and run from their kids, abandoning them to their ex, but some people want to keep as much of their family healthy and intact as possible, forcing them to go to court or other forms of confrontational discourse in order to achieve their goals.
Many of us come from communities that have been split and the only way to rebuild and regroup is by engaging the missing community members where they are.
Sure, that’s a valid view, but a healthy divorce also doesn’t include yelling obscenities at the other parent in public and raiding the house you both used to live in (not that I object to the language used). It’s still minimising contact to what’s necessary. And maybe accepting that some kids would like to stay with the other parent and focusing on those kids that want to stay with you.
Which is another failure of using personal relationships as an analogy to corporations vs people.
We are not talking about interpersonal emotional discourse, we are talking about consumer vs corporation and corrupt capitalist corporate powers at work.
I say burn the megacorps myself but I understand not everybody is as passionate on that topic.
The original discussion was about user engagement and the cost to benefit ratio of engaging them. I find it somewhat hypocritical to claim we shouldn’t care about their success and to accept that some people want to use the site, while your original comment is complaining about user engagement on the other website.
If we are supposed to accept users being on the other website, why are you commenting about site traffic?
The breakup analogy falls short for numerous reasons, primarily because we are talking about communities rather than individuals.
More like a divorce with kids involved than a simple breakup. Some people are happy to divorce and run from their kids, abandoning them to their ex, but some people want to keep as much of their family healthy and intact as possible, forcing them to go to court or other forms of confrontational discourse in order to achieve their goals.
Many of us come from communities that have been split and the only way to rebuild and regroup is by engaging the missing community members where they are.
Sure, that’s a valid view, but a healthy divorce also doesn’t include yelling obscenities at the other parent in public and raiding the house you both used to live in (not that I object to the language used). It’s still minimising contact to what’s necessary. And maybe accepting that some kids would like to stay with the other parent and focusing on those kids that want to stay with you.
Which is another failure of using personal relationships as an analogy to corporations vs people.
We are not talking about interpersonal emotional discourse, we are talking about consumer vs corporation and corrupt capitalist corporate powers at work.
I say burn the megacorps myself but I understand not everybody is as passionate on that topic.
The original discussion was about user engagement and the cost to benefit ratio of engaging them. I find it somewhat hypocritical to claim we shouldn’t care about their success and to accept that some people want to use the site, while your original comment is complaining about user engagement on the other website.
If we are supposed to accept users being on the other website, why are you commenting about site traffic?