???

  • NaibofTabr
    link
    fedilink
    48 months ago

    Nice dodge.

    If this had been a dodge I would’ve just moved on without explaining why what I think doesn’t matter, which I of course immediately did in the same sentence.

    I don’t think its a generalization

    And yet, your conclusion has no specific examples or support of any kind beyond your own impressions and feelings… so it is generalization.

    I think its inherently perpendicular to the goals of the platform

    Interesting. What are “the goals of the platform”?

    The existence of moderators suggests we can’t be trusted to say anything we want.

    The existence of moderators suggests that moderating conversation between humans requires contextual, circumstantial, individual and specific decision-making. That is, it requires human attention on each instance rather than broad conversation-affecting policies.

    but orients people to encourage more which engages users.

    Does it? Do you have any data to support this conclusion?

    If there’s one thing we’ve learned from social media companies, it’s that nothing drives user engagement like negativity. Now understand, I’m not saying this is good or that the outrage-surfacing algorithms are something to emulate, I am only saying that your statement here isn’t supported by available evidence.

    And yes, I think trolls who spam downvotes need parenting.

    I’m pulling this statement out of order and out of context because I want to emphasize it specifically. In my opinion lemmy is not an appropriate place for this nor are you (or anyone here) the appropriate person to try to parent other people who you have only interacted with via lemmy (unless someone directly asks you for mentoring in some way). Again, I think this reveals a desire to control the way that other people express themselves.

    • @[email protected]OP
      link
      fedilink
      2
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      I was referring to the goals that you listed in the previous comment. It seems like you entire argument is that I do not have any objective data on subjective goals. And yes, the presence of moderators and community/platform rules also reveals a desire to control the way people express themselves.

      This post isn’t a submission for a code change, its to get the conversation started on the problem (that you refuse to acknowledge) of users who predominantly leave downvotes. Your persistence about my lack of data is goofy, just nip it in the bud and say you will only consider policy changes proposed by moderators with stats to back their proposal. This is post is supposed to be the thing that might spur someone with the data to then look into it.

      • NaibofTabr
        link
        fedilink
        28 months ago

        It seems like you entire argument is that I do not have any objective data on subjective goals.

        Actually, my argument is that the motivation to control user interaction in a broad way like you propose is inherently flawed because it comes from a desire to control people.

        And yes, the presence of moderators and community/platform rules also reveals a desire to control the way people express themselves.

        The difference, again, is that moderator actions are individual, specific, contextual, and limited to a specific point in time, and also logged. Removing a particular comment or banning a particular user is very different from adjusting the balance of voting wholesale. Moderation is better because it is limited and flexible to each individual situation.

        its to get the conversation started on the problem (that you refuse to acknowledge) of users who predominantly leave downvotes.

        No, I am not refusing to acknowledge the problem, I am saying that your proposed solution (1) won’t address that problem effectively and (2) will create additional problems that (long-term) will be worse for the community. The cost/benefit doesn’t work out.

        I comment on your lack of data because I think your conclusions about what will or won’t improve community interaction are emotional and anecdotal. And frankly, I think the track record of social media demonstrates the opposite - people engage with controversy. Enforced positivity turns people off, it kills meaningful conversation. It’s like Disneyland - nice for a visit, but you wouldn’t want to live there.