The best thing you can do for the fediverse is just be kind
-
You’ve once again shown your empty accusations and insults, contrary to OP’s advice in this post.
You will never be accepted in this space no matter how many alt accounts you make to downvote people.
This isn't reddit you fascist, your tactics don't work here.
-
Technically anyone can spin up an instance centered on whatever dark and inhumane topic. That's the reality of an open network. That's why defederation and whitelisting are such important tools as Fediverse grows. You don't actually want access to every last bit of information on the network.
Glad we agree then.
Defed all intolerance.
-
These people don't deserve validation.
It is not to validate them, it is to discredit them and provide red flags to would-be readers how dangerous their ideas are.
-
A broken clock is right twice a day. And it is not like the Hungarian freedom fighters are mujahideen turned Taliban.
-
A big problem is too much politics, feels like politics is always brought up even in posts where it's not the topic of discussion. Just look at this post. Then if someone disagrees with your view they'll attack you and then they'll claim they "are on the right side". People have forgotten the golden rule.
It's very front of mind because these are the "interesting times" from the Chinese curse. Even people I've always known to say they don't pay attention to politics, can't watch the news it just makes me sad, etc. These people are talking politics every day. It's hard not to.
-
Love how the point of the post is “hey try to be nice” and everyone sounding off in the comments like “FUCK YOU AND FUCK THOSE SPECIFIC GUYS TOO”
Maybe more people should just post their reviews of vacuums here
I have a shark vacuum, I don't know the model. It's really good for two reasons. First, it slides down low profile to go under things easily. Second, it has a three foot long detachable suck stick so you can get bigger stuff or get down in cracks. It's great for around the litter boxes. 4.5 stars because things could always suck more.
C/dullmensclub
-
A lot of people dive in as if the entire fediverse has the same level of nerve as 4chan.
There are a lot of sensitive people here. The best thing I learned through my dealings with Mastodon is to be kind, and lurk before hitting that comment button.
The level of discord on the fediverse waxes and wanes depending where you are. There are conversations I'd never have here, that I'd gladly have elsewhere with no ill effects. The right words for the right group of people.
"Sensitive" people can be really toxic too. Some people just enjoy being outraged.
-
It is not to validate them, it is to discredit them and provide red flags to would-be readers how dangerous their ideas are.
It makes them feel validated, they're not capable of self reflection
-
The fediverse is small, and thats both a blessing and a curse - one of its several blessings is that in a smaller space we all individually have a bigger impact on what the culture of this space is like.
On this comm (and on lemmy broadly) there's a lot of discussion about how to grow the fediverse, what to improve, but an easy thing you can do for the fediverse is right in front of us-
-
Be kind
-
Ask people what they think, and why
-
Approach folks you disagree with with curiosity rather than hostility
-
Engage sincerely
-
Ask yourself if there's something nice you can say
-
Make this small space worth being in
A platform lives or dies by what's available on said platform and often we have this conversation in the context of "content" or posts - and we may never have as much content as reddit does. But content and posts aren't the only thing this kind of platform offers- it also offers people. It offers community, and human interaction.
Culture and community is lemmy and the fediverse's biggest differentiator, and we all have a role to play in shaping the culture of this space.
The biggest thing you can do to help the fediverse is make it a place worth being.
I disagree, yes being kind is very important but even more important is people engaging and upvoting comments.
Reddit was great because of what happened in the comment section, not the headliners, and I see very little voting engagement even in active posts.
Remember, it's free to do and it encourages others to engage as well. But yea be kind too
-
-
Ikr, I like pissing people off then making much of them for not being able to defend their position. I think it's good for engagement
We do not need all the engagement. Just engagement that most lemming users enjoy. The comments of spam bots for example are also good for engagement but are not enjoyable content. I personally hate being pissed of online cause it caries into my real life and people in general also do so most people come to this general idea that they don't piss anyone of and expect other people to come to the same conclusion of not pissing anyone of. This leads to a less toxic environment which allows them to spend more of their time and energy on more productive stuff. Cause at the end of the day needlessly making other people feel bad for your own entertainment is a downwards spiral if everyone's doing it.
-
A big problem is too much politics, feels like politics is always brought up even in posts where it's not the topic of discussion. Just look at this post. Then if someone disagrees with your view they'll attack you and then they'll claim they "are on the right side". People have forgotten the golden rule.
I disagree, if political discourse can't survive public debate, then it isn't a very good political ideology.
We have been artificially hampered on other platforms by having to be nice to the nazis, we don't have to do that here and I fully welcome such debate because none of their abhorrent ideologies hold up under scrutiny
As for left leaning political debate, we have ALWAYS argued with each other. That is one of our greatest strengths that we just don't all into line with everything the top says. Also one of our greatest weaknesses.
But to stifle that artificially will just force it to bleed into other discussions.
I say up with political discourse and let the marketplace of ideas be conceptually free of bias and the results will be that humanity in general considers nazis pretty bad people
-
Most people know this in some capacity, but it's not talked about enough: the shape of the platform massively shapes its culture. Every mechanism, intentional feature or not, is a factor in resulting user behavior and should be accounted for.
Reddit Karma was (shitty) reputation from the start, but Slashdot user IDs became one despite being mere sequential identifiers; negative user feedback such as downvotes can be harmful to communities (yet, users without an outlet may lash out in other ways e.g. reports); even how the platform communicates with users influences them; and so on.
I'm not saying you shouldn't be nice and incentivize others to do the same, but unless the system naturally leads to the desired behavior, you'll have a bad time in the long term because building culture by interactions doesn't scale. By the time you realize there's a shift, it's too late; interactions will compound and affect how the average user acts faster than you can try to course-correct.
I wish lemmy was more experimental, because by building a clone of reddit, we've copied too many of its faults. We've already got gatherings to complain about mods, and the one time devs considered changing a core component, discussion was killed by an onslaught of users. Problems with the current setup that were brought up then will likely never see that amount of people thinking about how to solve them.
Contrast with Mastodon, which gets crap for not being a more faithful copy of twitter, but their reasoning for not including quote-reblogs is understandable. They're now putting a lot of thought into how to add them safely. Not ignoring functionality users want, but also not ignoring how it will affect culture, that's compromise.
I'd like it if we could talk more about how our platforms work and, specifically, how they affect us.
People were right to be angry about removing voting visibility.
The surest sign a community is toxic is voting patterns and removing our access to that removes our ability to combat the continuing enshittification of lemmy.
And there are many, many mods that need to be complained about.
Though you are right that no-nuance upvote/downvote is a really shitty metric
-
If I'm in a toxic mood, I go to reddit.
-
Socialist software developers created their own place, Lemmy, because corporate social media told them they did not fit in there.
Hey thanks for being a good human
-
Multiple accounts are a must!
...or so I've been told
You have been lied to
-
You would think the internet is full of bees looking to make honey but really it’s full of beetles wanting to roll their shit.
Don't kink shame me!
-
Here are some more specific examples to think about!
-
Compliment people's art and ask about their process
-
Teach people about something you're knowledgeable on
-
Give constructive criticism on peoples projects when it's welcome
-
Thank people for posting things you're glad you got to see, tell them you enjoyed it
-
Tell people you're glad they're here
-
Tell people you hope they have a good day
Thanks for taking the time to read my thoughts
-
-
I disagree, if political discourse can't survive public debate, then it isn't a very good political ideology.
We have been artificially hampered on other platforms by having to be nice to the nazis, we don't have to do that here and I fully welcome such debate because none of their abhorrent ideologies hold up under scrutiny
As for left leaning political debate, we have ALWAYS argued with each other. That is one of our greatest strengths that we just don't all into line with everything the top says. Also one of our greatest weaknesses.
But to stifle that artificially will just force it to bleed into other discussions.
I say up with political discourse and let the marketplace of ideas be conceptually free of bias and the results will be that humanity in general considers nazis pretty bad people
disagree, if political discourse can’t survive public debate, then it isn’t a very good political ideology.
They made it clear they're talking about spaces and topics not about politics. People who feel entitled and compelled to make everything a political culture war are insufferable. Made worse when they call everyone who disagrees with them a Nazi. The word has lost all meaning now.
-
The “tolerance paradox” is a handy tool with which to justify violence by those on both sides. If I’m just fighting intolerance, then my actions are justified. It’s a common rally cry used by authoritarians to stamp out diversity and democracy. To really hammer the point home, the Nazis were the first to employ it. By blaming their issues on the “intolerance” of foreign states, they justified a global war. It is obviously the inspiration for Popper’s 1945 work, The Open Society and Its Enemies. Russia is currently using this fallacy to justify the war in Ukraine, claiming that the West is “intolerant” of Russia, and they need to defend themselves against this intolerance.
Here is a full quote from Popper on the subject if anyone is interested.
I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise.
But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols.
Popper’s argument is laid bare here. Tolerate up to the point of violence. That is, if one physically attacks us, we no longer have the burden of tolerance. Popper is commonly misquoted and intentionally misused to justify violence, suppresion, and censorship against disagreement, and that is clearly not his argument.
-
To be clear, I mean people who praise Hitler, put swastikas on things, blame everything on a Jewish Conspiracy, etc.
You know, Nazis.
That's coherent. Unfortunately most people who use it today literally mean "someone who disagrees with me." It really muddies the water because it's often accompanied by threats of violence. The net effect is raising the temperature in the room on both sides, because it's effectively dehumanising others who have perfectly valid political disagreements, and calling for their death.
