Some Reddit users just love to disagree, new AI-powered troll-spotting algorithm finds
Some Reddit users just love to disagree, new AI-powered troll-spotting algorithm finds
those are the people who no one irl talks to anymore because they impulsively take the opposing stance, regardless of how stupid that stance may be, any time anyone says anything
Yup and guess what they are way more vocal online since they can still have an audience there and this is one of the reasons social media sites are so skewed from representing generalizable opinions. It's a contrarian incubator.
I play devil's advocate in most friend-space conversations, it's just who I am, I don't do it disrespectfully (I hope) but it's just the first thing my brain goes to.
sometimes it's good to examine things from all angles; i'm mostly talking about people who will start arguing if you say "nice weather today"-- shit gets old quick
No they are not
I'm in this comment, and I don't like it
I had a colleague like that, he was an electric engineer who was convinced that the Earth is flat and that vaccines are bad.
I know that guy he told me he knows of a colleague who was convinced that the earth is spherical and vaccines are great.
MAGA??
Disagreeing isnt trolling. On reddit you see so much stuff that is so plain and agreeable its not worth adding agreeable comment #2000. So it only becomes worth commenting if you see a post where you actually have a disagreement with the majority.
Oh, disagreeing with the post, huh? Looks like we found the AI troll, get 'em everyone!
Read the article. It's not about normal run of the mill disagreement. It's about:
...an entire class of Reddit users whose primary purpose seems to be to disagree with others. These users specifically seek out opportunities to post contradictory comments, especially in response to disagreement, and then move on without waiting for replies.
Absolutely. Someone will always disagree and that‘s a good thing, actually. Bubbles are just as if not more problematic than the disagreeing „troll“. Sometimes there are reasons to play devil‘s advocate and sometimes you just bring up concerns that you‘d like to be eliminated.
I remember when I was part of a tiny minority bringing up concerns over Elon Musk and let me tell you the pushback and ridicule I received IRL was even worse than discourse online at the time. It took a long time until someone came up to me and actually admitted that I was right about Musk the entire time. I just failed to bring my point across earlier because they were better at debating but I like to think I sped up their process of becoming disillusioned about tech billionaires a little bit.
There‘s also a case where I got temporarily banned from a community I was very active in and labelled as a „right wing troll“ when almost every comment I made on Lemmy pointed to the opposite. A moderator probably had a bad day, read a comment they disagreed with and let the hammer fall down before even doing as little as to check my post history. Not much harm done I guess but man we should learn to embrace other opinions a little more.
If you actually think about things and form your own opinions you'll usually be treated as "the other side" by everyone who signs and follows any pre-made set of opinions.
If you hate AI but thinks there is some specific situation in which it doesn't 100% suck, you'll be treated as a troll in anti-AI communities. If you're MAGA but disagrees with anything Trump says, you'll be called a leftist in conservative circles. If you're a fierce active defender of LGBTQ+ rights but thinks it's OK for a white American to dress up as a Mexican character for Halloween, you'll be ostracized in many left wing groups.
Disagreeing is often treated as trolling by those you disagree with, depending on the subject. Mostly because those disagreements are often bad faith talking points from some groups of people.
Forming a counter argument is time consuming and requires you to think about the topic.
Calling someone names and labeling them a "troll" is much easier.
Repeating bad faith talking points isnt trolling. To me its a perspective issue. What I think is bad faith talking points might be reality to another person.
But this isn't about people seeking worthwhile debates
These users specifically seek out opportunities to post contradictory comments, especially in response to disagreement, and then move on without waiting for replies.
Ah okay but you won't respond to this.
This is a great point, not sure what kind of bias it is, but you’d literally see thousands of people agreeing (the upvotes) and then 10 people circling around in a knife fight. Did we need science to tell us Reddit is full of trolls? Trolls existed on Reddit before LLMs became popular.
It's called being contrarian, and it's not just Reddit users. I have several family members like this.
There's something quite funny about making a few replies to people on a topic, doing something else with your life for several hours, then logging back in to a shitstorm. I've done it unintentionally a few times.
We've all done that. One time I posted something and forgot about it. Came back next day and found the first person to comment completely derailed what I was saying by mischaracterizing it. And then all the replies were about the mischaracterization and there were no replies to the substance of what I actually said.
I can definitely sympathise with that.
Survivor bias aside, I'm not sure the UI doesn't make this drive-by trolling worse. The reddit UI (hi Lemmy) is threaded but disjoint, and the excellent response to one tree of responses isn't useful to or seen in another tree -- and those trees will develop in parallel in almost every discussion.
I worry that quips and cheap takes stand out because they're fast and block actual discussion more, so have that mock 'finalising' effect. Ending a discussion thread is not concluding it .
.. and we all have that cousin whom no one invites anywhere because he'll argue the shit out of something like a jackal worrying a carcass, until people just give up and let him wander smugly off to his little corner in contrarian triumph.
*whomst
I have a reddit coworker, he just disagrees and follows up with "fucking retard" while being blatantly wrong...i hope they fire the guy soon.
Unmanageable human being, impossible to learn anything to keep him from killing himself (my job is technically life threatening, if you're too stupid to listen)
He also mamaged to call in sick for 2 weeks in his first 4 weeks of employment, i was surprised when they kept him on after that.
i was surprised when they kept him on after that.
Clearly did not learn anything from The Office Space. that's management material and your future boss
I fear for it, honestly.
Luckily i'm already planning to leave. I haven't found a good job within reach yet, it'll come haha.
Disagreement is a way to promote dialog.
It's also a way to manufacture dissent and foster division.
Wrong.
theres also Bots/ai arguing against other bots to sow dissent.
How to get rid of the last few human reddit users ... and freedom of speech.
Thanks AI... Using tremendous amounts of energy and technology to tell us something that anyone paying attention would have already known
Apparently not since most of them stuck around. Fuck Reddit.
No u.
In other news, water is wet.
No it's not. You are.
Trolling and disagreeing are not the same thing.
I am someone who “loves to disagree”, as in most of my engagement on lemmy is disagreeing. But that’s because I speak up when I feel like speaking up is needed, and when I feel like it’s needed is when what I believe is not being said.
This post feels like bait
Dude your mom feels like bait
This is one of those stupid articles that are like "water is wet says a new study" and far more people than it should be say "holy fuck it's wet when I wash things. It must mean I wash things with water. Omgomgomgomg!!"
No shit users are trolls on reddit.
Thats not true
No it’s not!
I disagree
Yeah i enjoy arguing online
no you don't 😜
Disagreeing is not trolling. I hate post where everyone just comments the same thing. It's has no value, it's boring.
When people have different opinions and exchange ideas it gets interesting.
read the article.
Perhaps our most striking result was finding an entire class of Reddit users whose primary purpose seems to be to disagree with others. These users specifically seek out opportunities to post contradictory comments, especially in response to disagreement, and then move on without waiting for replies.
So if you look at my comment history at Reddit you would find few "totally agree, here's an upvote" comments and a lot "I totally disagree with this statement" type of comments. Not because I was trolling. I just find "you're so right" type of comments boring. I don't know what the "move on without waiting for replies" part implies. Who waits for replies on reddit? Do they mean they just never reply bak? If so that's also not typical trolling.
I’ve been online since 1995. And back in those days, about the worst argument people had was Star Wars vs Star Trek. That’s because the general online population at that time valued fact-based discussion and proper sources. Not like today, where someone’s feelings seem to trump actual fact.
If I post 1+1=2 with proper sources, some idiot is bound to come along to argue that 1+1=tomato soup, that the moon is made of aged brie and that 5G on phones is turning frogs gay. It’s exhausting.
There’s simply too many blithering idiots online who reject facts. And unfortunately instead of blocking them, people engage. Thus giving them incentive to keep doing it.
Disclaimer, nostalgia glasses may color experiences in a slightly more positive light than it really was.
Bizarre to have a headline claiming five "types" were identified, but then only describe the behavior of a single type. What are the other four?
There's way more than five. (bugger - the images seem to be gone from that old site)
It's called a dialectic.
Omg no it isn't!
This is literally the point, there is a clear difference between a hegelian dialectic and brute-force manichaeanism.
Social media has allowed us to perceive the one as the other.
Now everybody thinks they're the only righteous ones and anyone who deviates from their strict opinion dogma is evil.
I mean if you’re on r/star wars or a political subreddit, then yeah lol.
It might be quicker to list the subreddits where this doesn't happen
(Lookin at you, r/stardewvalley)
insert 2 spidermen pointing at each other
They're here too
No they're not.
/s
Playing Devil's Advocate. has been around way before the internet.
I just call it out immediately and shut people down. I spend countless hours researching and reading and I don't have time for devil's advocates anymore. Here on Lemmy I will just block them and in real life I just tell them homie I don't play that.
Sounds like that antiyank guy. Always looking for the latest drama.
Probably a lot of russian trolls as well
Some people while cleaning a table just love to scratch it a bit. Why not leave that fossilized fat stain alone.
Same vibes. There's no use in agreeing. You are just adding to a clueless crowd.
Disagreeing helps everyone.
FIFY
Yes some people love to argue. I get it, I think arguing with others is fun. It's not so great online tho. It's empty and soul-less.
I didn’t need ai to tell you that
I could have told you that 20 years ago
It’s why people find multiplayer games fun
It doesn't even sound like a reasonable study to undertake honestly, how many times do you comment on something just to say you agree? Mostly people just read it and move on, maybe upvote.
This should be illegal. As a person who was once false flagged manually by network attribution. Of course the anti troll flagging network was itself socially destroyed by time and is frequently cause of scandals while nobody cares for me.
Add certain language patterns and political stances and you have an excellent oppressive tool.
The behavior the study is referring to, is actually result of reddit's algorithms and human psychology. Often the contrarian view of whatever the post is about will automatically float to the top, no matter the topic, opinionated, factual or debunking, nature.
Devils advocate is very much in my nature but not so much when things are being done so obviously badly. Its great when discussions are more philisophical in nature.
I want to know what the five basic kinds of users are to see which kind I am!
I disagree.
I think you're wrong.
Well ackshually...
I disagree
"Then you are banned." -- Redditor Jannie
Then we agree to disagree
It's not something you can agree or not, it's a fact!