Waffles eat Bluesky | TechCrunch

During the past few days, two Bluesky summaries are increasingly filled with mysterious posts about pancakes.

It seems that the background and the background began with the participation of a tongue in the cheek, written by Jerry Chen, which fills a form of punishment on social media that has become very known to Bluesky: “(Bluesky user explodes into a waffle house) Oh, you hate pancakes?”

The CEO of Bluesky Jay Griber quoted this, adding, “We are very real. We will try to fix this. Social media should not be this way.” Then another user asked, “Jesse Sinjal has yet banned or” that GRABER answered, “Pyramids!”

The presence of Singal on Bluesky Flash was last year – while Bluesky built an early reputation as a haven for transformed users, Singal was widely criticized for his writing on transient issues. A chance.org seam argues that Singal violated the guidelines of the social network community and called Bluesky to ban more than 28,000 signatures, and the most filling user was on Bluesky until he was overlooked by Vice president JD Vance.

In a follow -up post, GRABER wrote, “Hype up with the amendments in banning someone who has never succeeded. And harassing people in general has never changed their opinion.” She also shattered the controversy by posting the Wink-Wink-Wink of Wafles image, as Singal did.

Users continued to criticize her, with GRABER again launching – when one compared cash to the customer who threatens to cancel their service, I asked: “Do you pay us?” where? When another suggested to apologize, Ghobar said: “You can try a sticker. I hear that works. “

It may be tempting to reject this entirely as another example of left -wing fighting, especially since Bluesky has already moved to the issue of whether “Clanker” is great.

Or perhaps, as one satirical account suggested, there was only “gas leakage for a week in Bluesky HQ.”

But the controversy also confirms the ongoing tensions between the company and some of its most vocal users. It is a tension that can be seen last month in skeptical responses to the updated community guidelines of the company, and in frequent complaints that Bluesky was very fast in banning Palestinian and user users, while providing indulgence for major accounts such as Singal.

It may be simplified to reduce this tension for one reason, but I think that many of them come from different visions about what makes Bluesky distinctive: If you think that the Bluesky community, especially since the early community of marginalized users, can feel like a betrayal when Bluesky executives seem unwilling to stand on these users.

One of the users who spread under the name Katie Tockpussy speculated that Bluesky’s driving may hate “the presence of a large application on social media they never wanted” and suggested that they revolve against it so that they could return “to the protocol as they did not think about the views of Plebeians again.”

In fact, when GRABER does not respond to criticism with posts about pies, it resisted the Bluesky identification with any specific group or political mile, instead emphasizing the decentralized protocol that allows users to build their own alternatives.

In the midst of the current controversy, it was published about “the acceleration of decentralization” and wrote, “We are architects in the system. We have built a decentralized network so that you can operate the special moderation”, then suggested that “the company’s upcoming health speech project takes some fluctuations in the interaction form that drives these dynamics on Bluesky.”

Perhaps GRABER has expected some version of this conflict when Bluesky began to see a central system that allows users to deport elsewhere if they are not satisfied with the company’s leadership. It was also reported in the Bluesky Foundation documents, “The company is a future opponent”.