I totally agree with that, although the language is unnecessarily diminutive. It's just an extension of the eternal September problem.
Companies often seem to forget that only like 1% of their users typically actually create the vast majority of content. Even fewer create the real quality content that is so attractive to begin with. It is the quality content, not general content that actually creates value to other users of the consumer variety.
So... looking at metrics of what appeals to the 99% of consumer users and allowing that to drive design, to the point where it pisses off that 1% is a ticking time bomb. It's a seductive one though! You can have all manner of metrics that will look good, but are actually catastrophic in a delayed way: 'More engagement!' is easier to conclude from measurements and looks a lot better than 'Signal to noise ratio of quality content to generic content has decreased'. 'This new change makes it easier for non-technical people to sign up or post or consume content' seems great until you realize that's code for 'uh oh, it looks like the voting effects of newer users are suppressing quality content over less-nuanced content and signal to noise has decreased even further'. But those things also temporarily look good: 'more users!' 'more revenue!'
And the social media implosion cycle begins anew as quality users leave in droves to a new platform.
Companies often seem to forget that only like 1% of their users typically actually create the vast majority of content. Even fewer create the real quality content that is so attractive to begin with. It is the quality content, not general content that actually creates value to other users of the consumer variety.
So... looking at metrics of what appeals to the 99% of consumer users and allowing that to drive design, to the point where it pisses off that 1% is a ticking time bomb. It's a seductive one though! You can have all manner of metrics that will look good, but are actually catastrophic in a delayed way: 'More engagement!' is easier to conclude from measurements and looks a lot better than 'Signal to noise ratio of quality content to generic content has decreased'. 'This new change makes it easier for non-technical people to sign up or post or consume content' seems great until you realize that's code for 'uh oh, it looks like the voting effects of newer users are suppressing quality content over less-nuanced content and signal to noise has decreased even further'. But those things also temporarily look good: 'more users!' 'more revenue!'
And the social media implosion cycle begins anew as quality users leave in droves to a new platform.