I often wonder about the actual context of discussions around "the algorithm". Do I want an algorithm that is better at...

A. showing me the best content?
B. getting me the widest distribution?

It's such a difficult discussion to have in public, because 

1. No one in the 1% that creates content is ready to accept these two directions may be conflicting, ie. that my content is not that great.

2. The typical 90% that is mostly reading/liking is obviously in favor of A, but they are (by definition) not vocal.

3. Even between the 1-10% of users who post content, some are interested in writing (they want to share, and usually they only care about a few, specific, users reading them, their circle) and those who are interested in getting read (they will create based on what gets them attention).

Good luck to anyone trying to reconcile all these in a public discourse.

Dad, geek, conversation liquidity provider. vrypan.net (home), @l--o--l (fun). devcoin:$lemon3

Great take.. I completely agree I am on e of the 90% that will admit my content is shit. I am a pure content consumer and what I create I don't expect anyone to see unless it's tagged and targeted to a user. I have taken a leaf out of pichis book and been on a ruthless cull by muting my home feed. Let's see what I get left with of I am honest with myself.

Also side note replying on TBA app seems a little buggy.. When I hit reply takes a few seconds to process and then gets me the text box to type.