Do you have any rules you try to follow when engaging with others online?
-
To add on to this, there's no such thing as an alt account. You will eventually let something slip that will lead back to your main or to you. It's not plausible, but it is possible and I act accordingly.
-
-
Same goes for people actively misreading your content in the worst possible way obviously just to start some shit.
This has been a plague on reddit.
-
-
I only downvote when something is blatantly factually false or posted in bad faith (i.e. obviously trolling and I can't think of a good-faith reason why someone would post this).
If I merely disagree with something, I write an answer explaining why, or if there already is one that I agree with, I upvote that.
-
I only comment when I feel I am adding something to the conversation that nobody else has added. On many contentious topics, nearly everything that can be said has already been said by someone, so I usually don't comment on them.
-
Don't talk about politics or religion if you don't want to argue since most places are low trust and what you say will be taken in the worst possible way. Lurk for atleast 3 months before posting to get the vibe of the place. The report button exists. Don't feed the trolls.(see the troll song for why) If you don't fit in don't try, no one is going to defend your world view even if its normal IRL. Bare in mind that anything said online can't hurt you if you properly separate them for the IRL you. (E.g. repeating usernames, same email, ect will ID you.). ALL CAPS IS SHOUTING. Don't post AI generated stuff unless its upfrontly tagged. Most things aren't that deep and will be forgotten in 7 days.
-
I disagree
-
Do not entertain an argument of any kind. We're no longer in a realm where people can be reasoned or rationalized. People mostly just want you to be wrong and will break you down in trying to make you feel wrong. Block the moment someone starts swinging back at you.
If you see someone out in the open giving someone else a hard time, you can bet that they'll do it to you so block them also.
Never go too open with someone beyond your comfort level. People online can be notorious for abusing sensitive information for ammo, personal gain or to do with as they see fit.
-
I try to be patient.
-
You should read False Witnesses, it explains a phenomena you're touching on here. People normally don't actually care if what they believe is true, they want to feel virtuous and license themselves to believe the unbelievable in order to do so. I think you'll find the essay interesting.
-
Spot-on with how and why to engage and when to drop.
-
I saw somebody suggest that the voting buttons should be used to indicate whether the comment benefits the discussion or not.
I suppose the same would be true of the original post; does the post benefit the community.
For example, posting a blog of why Mitsubishi is the best car maker to a photography forum is a downvote, true or not. Posting that veganism isn't a sustainable lifestyle to a vegan sub is an upvote, but you'd better be ready for some backlash.
-
The last paragraph feels like this
-
treat everyone as if they're actual people behind the screen. because they are
-
Well.....there was a time when that was true. Now we've got a mostly dead internet. But yeah, if you're going to bother engaging because you believe they're real, then treat them like a person.
-
kinda forgot there are bots, even on lemmy
-
I misread the title as edging
Ive got nothing really to contribute, just know that I'm here rounding out the left-hand of the bell curve for the rest of you filthy animals!
-
I think Lemmy has the capacity to have even more bots, because moderation is so inconsistent and underfunded. The big sites have the resources to fight bots, but ironically have an incentive to embrace them because it reflects well on DAU. IMO the only thing keeping bots off lemmy is a lack of ROI. Great, you spent how much to influence the views of a minuscule userbase in the corner of the internet no one goes to?
Still, it does feel sometimes like our share of braindead group think is higher than it should be...
-
Downvotes are for low-quality content, bad-faith content, etc.
Most bright-line example of this is: if OP asks "what's your favourite fruit" and somebody says "bananas," don't downvote it just because you dislike bananas.
It gets harder when somebody says something you disagree with politically, but argues it well and in good faith. I would still not downvote in this circumstance.
For an example of when I would downvote: if OP asks "do bananas contain potassium?" and commenter says "No, only potatoes contain potassium." -- this is low quality content, they could have confirmed their answer with a quick google search.
