Asklemmy

I'll save you the time: "It's just conjecture".

In my experience Twitter was for modern Seinfeld jokes, mastodon is for monsterdon Sundays at 9pm et, and Lemmy is for commenting on Internet stuff.

Twitter have big interaction because user count is extremely high. For a microblogging platform maybe it requires that it needs lots of users and some "creators" who are followed by thousands of people, unlike communities which anyone can post and everyone joined the community can see.

I also think upvotes and downvotes plays a role too since mastodon does not have them(only boosts but boost actually shares with your own followers which might be very low)

An average post on Mastodon/X/Bluesky/Threads is "this is what I encounter" or "this is what I believe". Those kinds of posts don't specifically ask for a response. You can respond to it, but it doesn't require one.

That's not how you communicate on Lemmy or Reddit.

That's the difference.

Each platform has its own usages.

So to compare and say "well platform Y is more social, because there's more interaction than on platform 2" is a bit weird.

You wouldn't compare a letter with a message board on a town plaza either. Both can be used to communicate, but they're not comparable to each other.

Or in another way:
On Mastodon or Nostr, when you post something only a small subsection of the userbase actually sees it (only those who follow you, those that follow any of the hashtags that you used, or those that check the full firehose).
On Lemmy the entire community you posted it to can see your post.
Obviously you can get more response on Lemmy! More people get to see it.

It stands to question that with a fraction of the users on Lemmy, why is the interaction/engagement considerably higher?

mastodon is another "general interest" social media hub along the same vein of reddit or bluesky or .world or .ee, which means that (excluding its founding group) it takes many forms of long term investments to gain sufficient traction enough to establish a core group of active users (assuming that it ever succeeds at doing so at all) and that core group is a small fraction of its user base (presuming that a reddit post i saw years ago showing that a tiny fraction of users on social media are responsible for a vastly disproportionate amount of content on all platforms is true).

lemmy's political origins pre-included the identities and accompanying pre-built core groups that had already start coalescing in other social media platforms like reddit & tiktok. by the time of the reddit blackout protests those groups already had new online safe spaces in various lemmy instances and their ranks swelled at the same time other reddit users started to fill the ranks of other "general interest" instances like .world and later .ee

that link you posted on lemmy user counts reflects the "general interest" instance's difficulties of retaining a core group of active users that disproportionately create the most content. it's around this content is where you will find the interaction/engagement that characterizes lemmy's considerably higher engagement; instead of the news & link sharing lower interaction/engagement that characterizes the "general interest" instances.

right now; the "general interest" instances have a relatively handful of VERY prolific users expending a clearly excessive amount of time and effort at creating a sea of inactive communities & instances in the hopes that it might eventually serve as a basis for a "general interest" core group and i hope that they succeed; i think that the lemmyverse would be better with politically moderate points of view and i'm sure that the "general interest" instances won't lose all of their users to bluesky, threads, nostr, etc. by then.