I think I have now resigned to the fact that most people, even infosec professionals, are willing to look the other way on invasive data harvesting so long as they are able to maintain the level of engagement they are accustomed to.
That nice graphic @kel put together should be spread far and wide, but the sad truth is that most people don't seem to care about invasive data policies. They just want to be popular. I don't know how that ever changes.
We've had a few major infosec personalities come our way, but they quickly left. Clearly we aren't what they are looking for, even though they probably know they are safer here than nearly everyone else.
I think most people who come here enjoy their experience, but whatever grassroots marketing we've been doing hasn't really moved the needle much in 6 years. If we were going to have our big moment, it would have happened by now.
I appreciate what J has built and think there is a fantastic community of people here. It disappoints me that 30 million people would rather sign up for something with widely-publicized issues rather than something with a proven track record.
On the other hand, maybe those millions of sheep would ruin this place if they came here. Maybe CoSo is cool because it is small.
Anyway, thank you for listening to my sad and pointless TED talk.
EOF
@voltronic FWIW, I think Ben Wittes has a decent explanation in his latest substack post here (despite the title):
https://www.dogshirtdaily.com/p/the-russian-ambassador-responds-to
Having to start over from scratch after overinvesting in twitter is a really bitter pill I think.