💜SEEING BTS SOON IN DECEMBER💜

@blossomkookmin jangan ngerasa paling di jolimi, fandom lu noh banyak juga ngatain idol lain jelek. mata di bayar mata, jangan baperan. face the fact kalo jmn di foto itu emang jelek. case closed.

Hi @lastfm I'm reaching out publicly because I wasn't able to find another way to contact the appropriate people, and I genuinely hope someone on your team takes the time to read this. I've used Last.fm for years and have always considered it a valuable part of my music listening experience. I love music across many genres, and one of the artists I listen to most is BTS. Because I value the platform, I wanted to explain why so many users (including myself) are concerned about recent statements and decisions from your team. My concern isn't simply that you're changing how the real-time charts work. Companies evolve their products all the time. My concern is why those changes have been communicated and the message they send. In your official forum response discussing what was called "the K-pop problem," Last.fm specifically named BTS as the reason changes were being made to the real-time charts: "Through this, the phenomenon of BTS and BTS-related artists permanently monopolizing the chart or trending tracks page will be resolved." Immediately afterward, the post discusses mitigation strategies for "inauthentic" scrobbling activity. Whether intentional or not, placing those two ideas together creates a very clear implication: that BTS listeners are somehow responsible for inauthentic activity. No evidence was provided to support that connection, yet one specific artist and fandom were publicly singled out. If your concern is fraudulent scrobbling, then address fraudulent scrobbling. I think every user would support removing fake data. But if your concern is simply that one artist appears at the top of the charts because they have an exceptionally dedicated fanbase, that is an entirely different issue. Last.fm has always presented itself as a platform that measures listening habits. The purpose of data is to reflect reality, not to reshape it because the results are repetitive, inconvenient, or unexpected. If millions of people legitimately listen to the same artist every day, shouldn't the data reflect that? Changing a chart to unique listeners rather than total scrobbles is a perfectly reasonable product decision. But justifying that change by naming one artist gives the impression that the methodology is being changed because the data is producing results the company doesn't like. That's a dangerous precedent for any data platform. I've also noticed interactions from Last.fm's social media account with posts calling BTS fans "bots" or suggesting that our listening habits are somehow illegitimate. Even if those interactions weren't intended to endorse those opinions, they reinforce the perception created by the forum post, that BTS fans are viewed differently from other users. At the same time, many BTS listeners have reported legitimate scrobbles not being counted despite following Spotify's and Apple Music's streaming guidelines. If that's a technical issue, I sincerely hope it's investigated. If it's an intentional filtering decision, then users deserve transparency about how those decisions are being made. What concerns me most is consistency. Would Last.fm publicly name Taylor Swift if Swifties dominated the charts? Would you redesign your charts because another fandom listened more than everyone else? Would heavy listening by fans of The Beatles, Oasis, Metallica, or any other artist be described as a "problem"? If the answer is no, then BTS should not have been singled out either. Every large fandom has people who break rules. Every large fandom has people who stream heavily. Those are separate issues. Legitimate listening should never be treated as suspicious simply because it comes from an organized or passionate fanbase. The value of Last.fm has always been trust. Users trust that if they play music legitimately, their listening history is recorded accurately. Artists trust that the data reflects actual listening. Researchers, journalists, and music fans use Last.fm because they believe the platform measures behavior objectively. The moment users begin to wonder whether certain artists or fandoms are being treated differently, that trust begins to erode. I'm writing this not as someone looking for an argument, but as a longtime user who genuinely wants Last.fm to succeed. I would appreciate answers to a few simple questions: ** Why was BTS specifically named in an official company response instead of discussing chart methodology more broadly? ** Why were discussions of BTS immediately followed by references to "inauthentic" scrobbling without evidence connecting the two? **Is Last.fm intentionally filtering legitimate scrobbles from certain listening patterns? **Does Last.fm recognize how these communications have created the appearance of bias, even if that wasn't the intention? **Does the company plan to address these concerns publicly? I have screenshots of the official forum post, social media interactions, and examples of the issues I've referenced, and I'm happy to provide them if they're helpful. I truly hope Last.fm chooses to address this openly. Music is for everyone, and the data representing that music should be equally fair to everyone. Thank you for taking the time to read this. — Teresa

@Thebear1995T @pinksbabymon BTS didn't make anything easier for anyone but HYBE artists. How can a group pave the way but refuse to let any other group walk that path. You might want to check what "paving the path" mean