potterman28wxcv @ potterman28wxcv @beehaw.org

Posts

3

Comments

89

Joined

2 yr. ago

I think we still have two "shields" protecting our ways in Beehaw:

• the lack of downvotes. Perhaps people will downvote you from other instances. But you won't see those, so you will not care. I find that this removes a lot of negativity on its own.
• when someone posts from another instance, you can see it in their name: so you can take what they say with a pinch of salt. "Oh, he is not from Beehaw; it is more normal for them to behave like that. No use to argue strongly against them".

As long as we have those, and as long as the federated instances moderate harmful content, it is OK for me to remain federated with them.

It was a reasonable to assume OP frequently purchases food

You specifically mentioned avocados and meat. I know some people who only buy local food and do not buy meat. Your reasoning would not apply to them.

while ignoring the much less ethical things you purchase far more often

OP did not indicate anywhere what kind of food they buy. You are judging them without knowing their habits.

I feel like some people just spend their day posting links to articles. They do engage in conversation as well apparently, but they also post 3-4 news per day sometimes. I do not understand why, as it just contributes to make the place more hollow.

I dislike content that has been auto-posted by bots. I treat it like spam instead of genuine content.

I would love to see a "bot" flag and a parameter on your profile to not show any "bot" content.

I guess people who make bots are scared that the Lemmy platforms would eventually stop seeing activity because of a lack of content. But I think that if there were little to no activity, perhaps people would be posting more. I doubt that flooding the platform with auto-generated content or auto-forwarded content actually helps with encouraging people to stay.

I love game mechanics that reward thinking or tactical decisions rather than rewarding how much time you spend grinding this or that. I do like having some kind of character progression - and that usually comes with grinding. But I hate it when the only challenge of a game is just how many hours you can sink into it. I much prefer when there are hard skill walls that you can't pass until you really got genuinely better at the game.

I hate generic boring quests that feel like they came straight out of a story generator. It's ok to have a few of them. But a hundred of them.. You play one, you played them all.. No incentive to do them. I much prefer a game that has only 10 hours of content but very solid content with well- designed narrative and places ; rather than 2 hours of human-made content and 48 hours of generated maps and quests.

One of the best games I have ever played is Dark Messiah of Might & Magic. That game has such an insane combat and a great narrative - I just couldn't put it down, I finished it in just one or two weeks because it was so good! And at the end I felt an emptiness, like when you've just finished watching an excellent serie and wonder what to do next.

Inventory management is one aspect of Diablo 1 that I liked a lot. If you played MP, you could either transfer your gear to mules.. But if you wanted to play "as the game is intended", you had very limited space to carry between games and had to choose which items you want to carry with you to the next game. I did a playthrough through the 3 difficulties with Warrior a few years ago and I loved having to make these choices.

In StackOverflow, when a user asks a similar question to one that was already asked, most of the time the question gets closed with a link to the "original" question without being told why the question is similar or how the answers to the "original" question can help the author.

That might be OKish for us experienced developers. But for a total beginner, I find this approach to be unsuitable. Most programming beginners don't even know how to phrase their question because they are not sure what they are struggling with themselves. Most of their posts will be like "There is something wrong with my code but I can't figure out what it is". That would not have a place on StackOverflow ; the post would get downvoted to infinity and the beginner - who is just looking to learn - will most probably say "Ok, StackOverflow no more" and move to other media for help.

One time I asked a question about Perl semantics ; I could not figure out the behavior of a program I wrote. My answer got closed and redirected to another question that did feature a similar program to mine, with a similar behavior. But the answer to that question was not it. It was not explaining the wrong behavior on my program ; although it was similar. At the end of the day I did manage to figure out what was happening ; it turns out it was an effect different from the post that was linked. I tried to make an Edit and asked for reopening my question in order to provide the real answer to that question but I think that did not get accepted.

Actually, now I cannot even find the question in my profile anymore. It probably got removed altogether.

I agree that the multitude of programming help communities is a problem and my proposition would exacerbate that. But StackOverflow is clearly not the answer for me.

Thanks for the suggestion, will do! I did not know about that instance

You make a point. If we were to relive the 90s both technology-wise and before corporations put their hands on it (so, assuming plenty of websites done by users), I am sure there would be quite a few websites filled with hate, racism, xenophobia etc..

It's not just the corporate greediness that changed. It's the mentality as a whole. We live in a stressful time period where being aggressive towards other people is more of a norm than, say, creating genuine content with lots of colors because that is cool. In the 90s I feel like people were just enjoying life and did not have to worry much. At least, that's how I perceive it. Even piece of arts like music or movies felt more genuine and happier.

But the author also makes a point that corporations certainly did not make it better.