imaqtpie @ imaqtpie @sh.itjust.works

Posts

19

Comments

1,264

Joined

2 yr. ago

Moderating

---

Based on this thread, sucking off China.

Yes. America controls the world, and Europeans are salty about it. I didn't even realize how salty until I started using Lemmy, but it's incredibly obvious on here.

FWIW, I would be salty too. But you can also be mature about it and realize that the average American isn't to blame for this reality.

I agree wholeheartedly. My assumption was that such behavior was simply a symptom of the relatively larger proportion of Europeans on this site, and their obvious jealousy and insecurity regarding Americans. I still believe that is the most likely explanation. To be clear, America has done hella dumb shit lately, and is deserving of criticism on many fronts. But what OP is referring to goes beyond that. It's emotional animosity that overflows the bounds of reasonable criticism and targets individuals rather than governmental decisions or policies.

The number of times that I have seen people refer to the American contribution to WWII as cowardice, meaningless, etc, is too damn high. 400,000 Americans died in that war. Read a fucking history book you ignorant, insensitive fucks.

It's certainly possible that there are agents in our midst sowing divisiveness, although unlikely. I don't have any beef with any nationality, because I don't judge people based on where they were born. That should be common sense, but it's apparently difficult for some people to wrap their heads around.

If it's off topic, it can be removed. If it's disruptive towards discussion, it can be removed. Let's not set up straw men before seeing how the policy plays out.

As far as I can tell, those aren't communities in any sense of the word. They seem more like soapboxes for spreading hatred and divisiveness. Good riddance.

I'm sure you're aware of this.

And you're obviously aware of what's going on with the other sub seeing as you just posted it to !yePTB

But thank you for providing examples of the concrete consequences of this policy. As is typical in our interactions, I wasn't previously aware of this.

Fair enough, you make some good points, although I stand by what I said and I still think this is a good decision on aggregate. Depending on votes is unreliable, but no more unreliable than depending on volunteer mods, and with less of a potential for severe abuse, imo.

I also want to emphasize that I don't think this decision will have a significant effect on the actual functioning of communities to the extent that you seem to believe, and it's more about the principle than anything else.

Thank you for the discussion, it was illuminating.

People are not identical clones. Some people are smarter and think more independently, while most tend to accept the dominant narrative, because thinking for yourself is emotionally and mentally draining. I would bet my left nut that the average lemming is smarter than the average redditor.

If you follow your own advice, if you're just part of the masses, then how can you possibly distinguish what is objectively false? You obviously believe yourself to be less susceptible to disinformation than others, because otherwise you would have no basis to be making claims about objective truths. Ultimately, it's up to the more intelligent people to determine what is true and false, and the best way to do that is through open, uncensored debate.

More frequently than not, the artificial suppression of irrational ideas causes them to become more problematic, because those ideas don't simply disappear when they are removed from a given forum. Instead, they are pushed to the fringes where there isn't anyone with the capacity to demonstrate that they are wrong, where they continue to incubate and become more extreme. They actually derive increased potency from the fact that they are being censored, because a significant portion of people take that as evidence that there must be some truth to them.

There hasn't ever been a consensus historically, tbh. But there was a hope that the internet could bridge that divide by connecting people and spreading information. Instead, it seems to have made things even worse. I had hoped that the corporate control over the web was to blame for this, but I'm not so sure anymore. Perhaps all online interaction is destined to exacerbate our differences. But I'm willing to keep trying until it's been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt.

I think that your example could fall under the umbrella of hate speech, and thus removal would be entirely justifiable. Even if it doesn't qualify as hate speech, moderators still have the discretion to remove it for a variety of other reasons. The mods' hands aren't being tied here, it's just providing a counterpoint to the tendency of mods to be overzealous and biased, which is common enough that multiple thriving communities are dedicated to exposing such behavior.

In general, I believe that the negative effects of overmoderation are more problematic for this platform than the negative effects of allowing idiots to get downvoted for saying dumb shit.

counter to objective reality

At the current moment, there is zero consensus among the human race as to what objective reality actually is. This is a fundamental problem for us as a species, and Lemmy should be a space where it's possible to seek answers to this question.

I think you may be overreacting to a policy that is, by definition, subjective and open to interpretation.

The masses don't use Lemmy. If you're using this platform, it's somewhat expected for you to have a modicum of critical thinking skills. If that's not the case, and you need to be protected from alternative viewpoints lest you fall under their spell, then you may as well just use reddit.

I support you in this decision. To me, Lemmy is fundamentally about the free exchange of ideas, independent from the prevailing mainstream dogma. This platform was built to accommodate a diversity of experiences and viewpoints, and allow people to engage with unfamiliar perspectives without being overwhelmed by them.

This policy only applies to lemmy.world, it doesn't apply to every server on the fediverse. If the complainers truly feel that their experience is being negatively impacted by this policy, then go ahead and move to one of the many servers that maintain the policy of removing and banning opposing viewpoints on sight. There's absolutely nothing wrong with finding your preferred walled garden and savoring that environment.

But if Lemmy is just a collection of echo chambers, there won't be any space for people to hash out their differences of opinion, and we will just become more isolated and out of touch. As the largest server in the network, I think it's quite suitable for lemmy.world to explicitly advocate for a diversity of viewpoints, and I believe it will ultimately benefit the platform as a whole.

Good stuff, thank you to all contributors

I'm not really good at being caustic, it goes against my nature. Point is it's a weird name ya freak

Verity Kindle sounds like the Mary Sue heroine of a trashy romance novel set in the Antebellum South. She ends up in a love triangle with the handsome young slave boy and the dashing plantation owner's son, but can she teach them the meaning of love before it's too late? Good grief, what a load of shite.

I'm peaking! Trippy

Tbf I can't really think of an indigenous Canadian automobile brand. Possibly Detroit being situated on the Great Lakes made the American car industry difficult to compete with historically.

It's a bold move Cotton, let's see if it pays off

Usually the user numbers will start off really strong when a community is initially founded (especially if its a transplantation) and then drop off significantly in the following months. There's typically a surge of posts which attracts users from /all and /new, but those users eventually filter out as the content slows down.

Yeah I mean that's more or less what I assumed, not really major enough for me.

the people posting are free to go to another community whenever they want, and when they leave, the old community usually dies.

You're not wrong and this has happened many times, also with c/anime leaving from lemmy.ml. But that doesn't mean things will always go that way. The posters have a lot of power sure, but the casual users also have a lot more influence than you might think. Most people aren't going to follow power posters to the ends of the earth, they'll simply engage with the content that is most readily available to them, and they really don't want to bother with splinter communities and moderation drama.

Damn, they really only have 200 weekly users? I knew they were small but I thought it would be at least a couple thousand. Federation is absolutely key, couldn't agree more.

They used to have 915 users for the last 6 months on the old one, they just reached 937 for this month on the new one, so I guess most of the people interested moved.

!remindme to check their activity numbers 6 months from now and see how they compare. Hopefully it will be higher but I wouldn't bet on it.

you can just announce that you are going to move, point to the new community, and then post the new content on the new community.

That's the friction point. Most people aren't as active as you are and tend to miss those kinds of announcements. Or they see an announcement and they scroll right past. That's where you lose 90% of subscribers.

I wasn't subscribed to the dbzer0 meme community, and I don't expect it to replace the original one. Without knowing anything about what went down, I think y'all should just keep posting in the original community. But I will reluctantly subscribe for the time being, only because I greatly enjoy my LOTR memes and I don't want to miss any good ones.

I'm not saying it's impossible, I'm just saying that it's very disruptive and should only be done as a last resort, because many Lemmy communities are fragile as is, and we don't have enough activity to fill the communities that already exist. Trying to break off communities and replace communities is a dangerous game, and shouldn't be encouraged to solve minor problems, but only for major, unavoidable problems. People are going to do what they want no matter what I say, but that's my advice.