90% of social media is the crowd of people using it. A new social media site will take over with having better people, which might be caused by getting better features but unlikely. Or, it could be that the dominant social media site makes blunders that push its users away, like Digg did.
Twitter used to be unbeatable for me in 1) areas with technical expertise or, 2) following the latest in news. Using Twitter to get the latest on news has only recently been destroyed, as evidenced by its failure as an information source during the recent hurricanes in the US.
And most technical users are now reevaluating the crap they have to put up with every day that they didn't have to a while back, and finding X lacking. And in science, this is especially with a new administration that is dedicated to science suppression (e.g. RFK Jr) and X is run by a wanna-be oligarch that wants a part in the administration controlling their social media without regard to free speech. (For example, blanket banning of "cis" made lots of discusion really hard. "Cis" is a technical word that is used all the time in my field unrelated to the culture war, and not being able to use it was infuriating and really made a lot of people angry that they were mere pawns in a stupid culture war. It is not a curse word or a slur or hateful word and nobody's life was made better by banning its use, but many discussions became silly.)
Mastodon is more clunky than Bluesky, too clunky to get working for most, though a lot of scientists got close. Bluesky is easier and is getting the community now.
