Seasoned_Greetings @ Seasoned_Greetings @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

94

Joined

2 yr. ago

Guys, this was always going to happen. There's no world where the admins roll over and cave to mods' demands. The point was to last as long as possible and get as noticed as possible in the process. To that end, and with regards to the fact that reddit is fumbling its efforts to find new mods, this whole thing was a success.

I salute those mods for giving up on years of a cultivated community to send a powerful message, and I genuinely hope they end up here.

Uh huh. I'm sure that the problem ruining sites like this is people pointing out when someone else is being rude.

Anyway, a second "no u" is certainly not a surprise. Lashing out over some simple advice, name calling instead of making a point, presuming I just don't understand you and acting like your opinion is any better by virtue of it being yours. All of these things reek of terminally online culture.

No, I get what you're trying to say. I understand that you also have an opinion on what makes sites like this bad. I'm also just saying you're wrong. Call me whatever you like, the fact is that people don't respect an asshole. You can try to be less of one, or you can just continue shouting into the void.

Either way, later tater.

Oh, like a little kiss

Oh good, the quintessential "no u". Another reddit staple. Ironically, that sounds like an anecdote and is therefore inadmissible by your logic.

The first step is to make it illegal to sideload "illegal" apps. It's the step that sounds reasonable that less informed people might agree with or at least not protest. The next step is to arbitrarily decide what makes an app illegal. By that point, it's too late to protest the actual law.

It's like the law in Florida making the punishment death for sexual assault on a child. That sounds fine until you realize that their legislature has announced their intent to make wearing clothes opposite your gender in public into sexual assault on a child.

Unilateral restrictive laws, without specific stipulations or conditions, even innocent sounding ones like this, are one bad actor away from being changed to a political weapon.

An anecdote can be evidence if the bar is low enough. I understand what you're getting at, but if the ask is for any evidence, an anecdote can be that.

Honestly, instead of being snarky you could just clarify what you want to see. That kind of attitude is why reddit slowly became a toxic hole.

News sites talk about news. That includes things that people don't like.

It's kind of like saying:

-Those guys on reddit sure do talk about Walmart taking advantage of their workers even though they hate capitalism

-Climate activists talk about climate change a lot, I thought they hated it?

-Why does fox news spend so much time hating on democrats? Don't they know that they aren't supposed to talk about stuff they disagree with?

Elon doesn't have to be liked to be relevant.

I wonder if people with that same sentiment go to picketing protestors and yell at them, “Just quit!!”

It's exactly the same energy. Nothing says "this isn't my problem so let me tell you how to solve it" like saying "so just quit!"

You're not wrong, but consider that people who justified sticking around for some reason or another might leave because the brand change (to a name that is so brain dead even a little offensive) finally hits home for them that it isn't going to be the same.

A brand name change is about the single most overt thing you can do to send the message that a product isn't going to be the same. And when that happens, people tend to look at the recent trends for that product to get an idea of what to expect. The recent trends for Twitter happen to be right-wing echo chamber.

So yeah, the people who were going to leave have largely already left. But this brand change is going to be effective at galvanizing those who remain.

I'm so tired of seeing this take. And this is from someone who hasn't opened a reddit link since July 1st.

Yeah, I agree that we shouldn't give them traffic. But do you think that the people like us are the ones driving that sentiment of "never forget what they stole"? Believe it or not, there exists a base of users who still browse reddit and want to see change. Those are users driving their engagement regardless of what they do. So why not spend that time protesting or sending a message?

Is it just me, or am I finding that the default sort of "hot" (lemmy.world, not sure about other instances) sorts a little more like "controversial" on reddit does, in that I still see heavily downvoted stuff before mildly voted stuff at all?

Any insight on how that works?

That's the rub. Nobody wants to be told they're irrelevant. Of course they believe that America is defined by people like them, because the alternative is to accept that America is defined by a culture that might as well be aliens to them.

They are losing a culture war. They feel like they have to announce their relevance, but they don't understand why that very thing means they are becoming irrelevant.

I'm not sure if you're talking about the left on a world wide scale, but in America I really don't think it's fair to say that the left is the side limiting free speech. Sure, they may paint the use of certain words as distasteful, but that's basically the extent. Leftists don't even tend to get the law involved outside of defining what may or may not be hate speech.

On the other side of the aisle, the right wing party is promoting book bans and firing teachers they disagree with. Several states have a version of the "don't say gay" bill that literally prohibits teachers from explaining why one student has two dads, and a similar bill that prohibits institutions from simply acknowledging a kid's preferred name. Texas and Florida are defunding colleges with curriculums they as a party don't like. Louisiana (along with a few other states) passed a bill requiring you to prove who you are with state ID before you can view something they deem inappropriate.

All of those things are actual examples of infringing the concept of free speech. Does the left do anything remotely like those things?

Came here to say this. The most literal definition of the word conservative in the context of the party is "to conserve old ways". They are resistant to change by definition.

Leftists use change as a tool to try to make things better. They're naturally more likely to embrace something new.

Do you know that donation to Mozilla don’t (and can’t legally) fund Firefox development, right?

Two lines on a graph don't prove that statement. What you've proven is that the chair of Mozilla is making more as the market share is going down. Now connect the dots with a source that shows why those numbers matter and you're golden.

"We won't use it for that even though we could"

Is just the first step in a series of corporate decisions that inevitably leads to

"We know we said we wouldn't, but we didn't realize how much money we could make"

Google took "do no evil" out of their mission statement. Why would you trust them to stick to their word and not develop this tech in a way that helps their own ad platform make money?

What if you knew it was shit, like you watched something defacate it. It still tastes like chocolate. Would you still eat that over a candy bar that you know is definitely factory produced and sanitary, but still tastes like shit?

Politicians in America have people on both sides hypnotized to equate socialism with bolshevik communism. That's a major reason why we can't move any meaningful distance left as a country, but we can move right at the blink of an eye. Socialism is a dirty word here, for no other reason than the fact that big corporations pay politicians to demonize it.

Me either. I left when they rolled that rule out in South America last year to test it. Netflix forgot that we went to them because cable was extorting us. As long as the internet remains a thing, there will always be other options.