Those were great observations, and I don’t disagree with you. I see the shock and rock artists playing a big part in this by creating a space and a desire for self-actualization. The entertainment value of things tends to burn out after a while and a person in the habit of using social media will simply spend less time looking at those things and .find something new to look at until that burns out. The changes I am suggesting would simply increase the types of content they are exposing to people and make the sights more interactive, keeping them relatively small and encouraging those to break off and start their own with their own particular slant on things. I have found the manner in which someone is exposed to something has a lot to do with how likely that person will be to take an interest in it.
Damnit, I heard bleak.
If by “earth” you mean “dirt”, maybe.
If the non-meek let them.
But see, this goes right back to how manipulative media is. Think of all the recent SovCit / Qanon threads. They start of with gentle, JAQ, or “why is the world this way” sorts of questions, that appeal to people who are tired, or trying to find their way in a complicated world. Things that few people would object too. Which then links to slightly more biased, but still reasonable content. And slowly but steadily those people are told that they can/could self-actualize, but XYZ is preventing it. And to prevent XYZ from making it worse, they need to understand that only ABC can be trusted.
And so on and so forth. Social media leads away from self-actualization, and towards bubbling yourself away from anything else. Especially for the meek.
I agree with this entirely. But see it burning itself out. I have quite a few premises that I base my theory on. Many of them are just basic facts or observations about human nature and many of them are from my own experience in social media groups. One of my favorites that kind of kicked off the whole thing was a statement I heard on a radio talk show about 40 years ago. He said: When people fall in love they fall in love with the way they feel about themselves when around that special person. Now if you substituted love for passion and added places or things to person it just tells us why we become motivated to take an interest in things. Just becoming involved can be the beginning of a positive feedback loop that can touch every area of their lives. People who are happy about who they tend to behave better as social beings.
I hope you’re right and I’m wrong, but I don’t see it burning itself out.
Let’s check back in 10 years or so.
Shoulda made it about the Bible, man. Then they’d have to leave it in GD as witnessing.
We changed the rule at long last. Witnessing is no longer part of GD.
So just witnessing now belongs here in MPSIMS like other bloggish posts.
The change became official Jul 29, '22
Humph. I bet y’all did it on purpose, just so my joke would fall flat eight months later! 
ETA: please don’t construe this as arguing with moderator decisions.
In what fashion?
– the tribes we evolved from were groups of on the order of 20 people internetworked with a handful of similar neighboring groups and linked by long-distance trade routes, for a small percentage of needs, with a number of others. Interactions were in person. Control of those interactions was local.
How do you think social media resembles this? And how does it do so “more closely” than whatever you’re comparing it to? And what exactly are you comparing it to?
How are you going to get the people currently running those sites to do any such thing? They appear to think that the money and/or the power is in doing the exact opposite.
True.
But there’s lots of money to be made in convincing people that they shouldn’t be happy about who they are, but should instead buy x, y, and z in order to attempt to fix all the things that are wrong with them.
I like this line of thinking. The only problem is that, when the brash and egotistical do run amok, they’ll take us with them. There won’t be anyone left to inherit anything. Either that or there won’t be anything livable left for the meek to inherit.
The brash and egotistical would simply have no power. Currently social media stars are looking for thousands of likes to support their self-image, this is because they are competing in a world with millions of people. .The need for validation and acceptance is relative. working in a smaller group of say 20 people one " Like" would have the value of 10,000 likes on open social media. The key is interconnected smaller groups.
I hear hurricanes a-blowin’
I know the end is comin’ soon
I fear rivers overflowin’
I hear the voice of rage and ruin
The meek shall inherit the earth once we’re done with it.
The meek usually tend to inherit the earth in small pieces, generally 4 feet wide by 8 feet long by 6 feet deep.
But then again, so does everyone else.
I think humility is the single most important quality for achieving long-term success in life. It takes a number of things: intelligence, money, health, beauty, graciousness, etc. All of them have to go through the same door, but humility, by its nature, is always the last in line.
I was comparing social media to the world we live in. I think it has the potential to recreate tribal dynamics because we have the potential to control the size of the villages and recreate the importance and value of whatever an individual contributes to his village.
The key would be not only exposure to a myriad of new things but also a system of advocacy that would help to direct and move people along through a virtual maze of opportunities to realize ones potential. Another key element is “how” people are introduced to new things. Over the past 10 years or so I have conducted several field studies on how people responded to new things. A successful social experience associated with the object of attention seems to be a prime ingredient. I will list a number of premises in my next post that I feel should be kept in mind when creating a social media platform of this type.
Why do you think social media is likely to move in this direction, rather than every platform trying to pull in as many people as possible and push influence from strangers at them? That appears to be where the money is.
Again, where do you think this is coming from, and why do you think it’s not going to instead move people along into a virtual maze of advertising whatever the media company thinks will make them the most money?
– I can theoretically imagine social media that works the way you’re talking about, sure. What I don’t see is any way that such a thing is going to become widespread in current society, or in any society remotely like it.
We are basically talking about a new concept on how to use social media. Very complicated to explain but extremely simple in practice because of it’s redundancy. Social media offers the potential for control not seen in other areas of life. Whenever there is the potential for control you will have abuse. This is where the conversation really starts. A system of rewards and punishments is built into the system based on achieving 1 primary goal! Creating opportunities for self-actualization through finding purpose in their existence. High standards for communicating would be mandated. Accountability would be swift but reasonable and loving in intent. There are several stages each being a long conversation in itself… One of my favorite stages is the discussion is where people can find purpose, there are literally an almost limitless. Amount of opportunities here when the environment allows for it. I am really not interested in selling the world on it, my goal is just to get a few people interested in talking about it.