Nice job articulating your arguments. Now that you’ve explained your stance, it can foster better discussion.

Since this explanation is so far down the thread, I suggest editing one of your more top level comments to include these points for better engagement.

I will say this: the whole point of Lemmy and federation is to have control. Each instance gets to choose what’s important for them. A singular UX experience isn’t possible by design. But that’s not to say there’s no room for improvement.

Thank you for including sources, this was my point to AnonymousWolf.

I should have said “they may not be the same” as I didn’t check either. I stand corrected.

Why are you passing off the onus of proof to me or others in this thread? It’s your argument.

Just google ‘Good UX principles’ and you’ll see Lemmy breaks so many of them

No thanks, I’m also a decades long IT Professional and I’m not going to do that. It’s your argument so your burden of proof.

Lemmy breaks basic UX principles the UX is bad on multiple levels

Again, please feel free to cite specific examples.

I don’t have any data to back it up

That was my point. A number of times in this thread, you’ve stated your opinion as “a fact” or expressed it as obviously correct. It’s possible to get your point across without the condescension and acknowledging it’s your opinion.

I agree that the nature of federation on Lemmy and other federated social networks is complicated. Resolving that is no easy task. However, your stance in this post seems to be the burden of choosing your instance should be removed or streamlined by randomization. I personally disagree - while there is a hurdle to having to choose an instance and that is a barrier to entry, it’s also valuable in them learning that this isn’t just another platform under a single umbrella.

You seem to be conflating “the vast majority” and “people my age”. They are not the same.

You’re also making a lot of global UX preference claims in this thread without sources or data to back them up.