AFK BRB Chocolate @ AFKBRBChocolate @lemmy.world

Yet another refugee who washed up on the shore after the great Reddit disas

---

Read more

Posts

43

Comments

2,012

Joined

2 yr. ago

Are you taking about those weird chewy ones? Because those are my favorites.

Remember all those headlines saying things like 'Trump could be found guilty of violating emoluments clause?" Yeah, put this in the same bucket.

I'm not going to say I'm okay with that privacy policy, so not reading the article, but the original complaint is quite a read.

I wonder if that’s related to a user base that skews heavily toward techies.

I did, thanks.

Completely agree. I personally I'm fine with the trade-off I made. There's even some benefits to a smaller site. I remember on Reddit there were lots of times I didn't make a comment, even when I had something to say, because there were already literally thousands of comments, some with thousands of upvotes, and I figured anything I said would be lost in the din. Here, if you've got something to say, it's very likely to be seen.

For sure, though that really doesn't solve the problem. If I'm really into sports-themed shot glasses, making a post in a community for drinking ware, or for sports merchandise, isn't going to mean I get more content about sports shot glasses, and it doesn't increase the number of people on the site who have something to say about them. On a platform with millions of users, there might be enough other people with the same interest to generate a critical mass of content.

Right, exactly. And let's not forget that a healthy percentage of all online communities is made of lurkers who don't really want to post at all, but they enjoy reading stuff they're interested in.

At my company, is have to tell that guy he can't wear that hat because we don't allow people to wear political stuff. I'm not a fan of dress codes, but I'm a fan of that one.

This is kind of bullshit. On a big platform, like Reddit, where there are orders of magnitude more users, the likelihood is that there are a good number of people interested in whatever niche topic you want. That's a draw for a lot of people. I left Reddit for Lemmy for good, but we're just not up to that kind of user base.

And it's not zero effort to get a community going and keep it active, especially with a small user base. It's perfectly reasonable for someone to want a place that discusses their niche interest without wanting to be responsible for running that place. It doesn't make them bad or lazy.

But wait, I'm in my 60s.

I agree, I'd like to be able to block a community from the main page as well. I have no issues with things like gay porn, but it would be nice to be able to block it from my feed without having to open the community.

I still think we're taking past each other. I'm not saying he won't become president or whatever. There are other people who have done that without personally being great strategists or especially bright. I think Cheney was a lot smarter than the president he served under. Vance might be smarter than Trump, but I don't think that's saying much.

Cheney wanted to start a war in the middle east for personal enrichment, and he made that happen. That's a huge deal, especially given he was just VP. Yes, terrible for the country, but really quite an accomplishment. I have seen no evidence that Vance has skills beyond just saying what he thinks people want to hear (regardless of accuracy).

I have no issues with any of them. I don't think I'd be a frequent Lemmy user if that's all there was though.

Maybe I didn't communicate well. I agree they're both openly corrupt opportunists. The difference is that Cheney is also a good strategist.

If Cheney wasn't evil and corrupt, he could have made a really positive impact on the country. Vance doesn't have any useful qualities that I can see, unless you value shamelessness.

You must get nothing but memes, Linux, and porn.

No, Cheney was a top-notch strategist. Evil, but smart. Vance is just an opportunist with no morals.

Pretty sure the drop in pregnancies under 19 was 50% of the overall drop, not 100%. That's still huge, but it's not the whole story.