Old habits die hard, but there’s Reddiquette which needs to be revived, and some which needs to die.

Many “golden-age” redditors remember a time when downvoting was reserved for hostility, not a different opinion. For the sake of our growing community I would like to implore everyone to be awesome to each other.

However, this place is not Reddit.

  • We don’t measure in bananas here.
  • We don’t need to append “edit: typo” to edited posts and comments.
  • if you see something which is worthy of a downvote: down vote and move on! Don’t engage with it and feed the algorithm/engament machine so other people are exposed to it when sorting by active.
  • @WontonSoup
    link
    9210 months ago

    Showing the reason you edit a post isn’t dumb, its to give a valid reason so people don’t think you edited to make someones response look bad. Saying its for context, adding a word or whatever just shows you didn’t edit it maliciously.

    The whole “edit: thanks for gold and I can’t believe my most upvoted comment was about editing!” can go away for sure though

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      16
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Holy shit agreed. The “thanks for le kind gold stranger” shit makes me want to fucking cut my throat. Some shit im begging to stay on leddit. All the shit on /r/circlejerk for example.

      Edit: le thanks for the gold kind stranger

    • @ZozanoOP
      link
      5
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      This argument never really made sense to me. Anyone who is being deceptive is not going to tell people they’re editing their comments.

      It’s the result of nothing more than a moral panic. There aren’t roving bands of keyboard warriors rolling around making comments and then editing them to make others look stupid.

      And even if there were, they could just include “edit: typo” and get away with it. Unless someone takes screenshots.

      I think it says more about the community that everyone is expected to prove their innocence. Let’s have a little faith in each other, we’re better than that.

      • Treevan 🇦🇺
        link
        fedilink
        2810 months ago

        It makes sense to me and I’ve been editing comments this way since the early 2000’s. For some, it’s a cultural practice that’s probably decades old.

        If the platform didn’t state the comment was edited, I probably wouldn’t bother but if it does, there is always a thought at the back of the reader’s mind about what happened. Leaving a note about editing negates the thought. Leaving pointless edits less so.

        I find it more ethical and transparent, particularly in discussion threads where debates are being held.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          4
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          I get it as a cultural thing, but it makes no sense epistemologically.

          An unethical person would not state they changed their comment, and a malicious person would state their edit was mundane. Those two factors alone render the practice of proving your innocence in advance moot.

          I think it’s sad that people reflexively assume the worst. I used to engage in some heated debates on Reddit, but I was never accused of, or assumed the other person edited their posts to make me look bad. It seems like paranoid behaviour to me.

          Strangely enough, if it became the norm to correct typos without stating it, the default assumption would be that the edit was a typo correction.

          • Treevan 🇦🇺
            link
            fedilink
            510 months ago

            I didn’t downvote you.

            I agree but like the premise of the argument is that there is trust issues, a edited reason makes it more trustworthy on a scale rather than nothing. I agree with that usually typos don’t require a reason but reddit? gave you 5? mins before an edited notification was placed on the comment for that reason.

            Bad actors are always going to act bad.

            I don’t even think downvotes need to exist to counter other aspects of the OP. I would rather a statement as to why this was a bad comment or post so as to make it a learning experience, an educational tool rather than a down arrow that could mean anything. I’ve been downvoted for adding relevant posts to the community I manage. What the fuck is that supposed to mean? Was it the content? Someone holding a grudge? What?

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              310 months ago

              As I just replied to another user, paraphrasing this: downvotes might be perceived as the community self-policing, but if you visit r/vegan you’ll see how that can make a community hostile. I’m a vegan and I can’t fucking stand that place. If you have an alternative opinion, prepare to wind up on the top of controversial, where the mob has a field day.

              I think some sub’s had the right idea by limiting the lower voting karma to 0. Another downside is it essentially paints a target for the community before an individual has formed an opinion. It generate the hive mind we should be avoiding.

              • Treevan 🇦🇺
                link
                fedilink
                210 months ago

                In that case, downvotes should be invisible. The sorting algorithm can see them but people can’t.

                I don’t believe that tiny communities and instances should have them on until a threshold is reached and they become “sortable”.

                Being visible is an aggressive moderation tool. It doesn’t foster discussion. reddit devolved into downvote heavy as time went on and I hated it, most of the time it didn’t make sense why things were downvoted. They work better for memes and pics, not comments (unless they are horrible) and discussions. Bad actors use the downvote for bad acting.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  210 months ago

                  I got nothing more to say, you hit the nail on the head.

                  It reminds me of grading movies. If someone says to me its an 8/10, that is useless information. If they tell me it has some action, I’m intruged. Then they tell me it’s a Marvel movie, and I lose all interest.

                  However, I will say that it was entertaining as fuck to see /u/spez’s comment karma tank - but he’s not really a member of the reddit community, just the warden hearing the prisoners shout “fuck you!” before starting a riot and a partial breakout.

  • @RomanRoy
    link
    3310 months ago

    I like the “edit:” append if I edited something, just to make it clear for whoever comes later.

    What’s the problem with it?

  • Ada
    link
    fedilink
    English
    2310 months ago

    We don’t need to append “edit: typo” to edited posts and comments.

    I didn’t do that because it was reddit etiquette. I did it because people can see I edited my post, and I would like them to be able to see why

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -2
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Why tell them you fixed typos? What’s the point?

      I’ve edited my comments for years to fix typos and clarify statments, and I never once had anyone accuse me of being disingenuous.

      And even if they did, that’s their, and their conspiratorial mind’s problem.

      • Ada
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1810 months ago

        Because otherwise people don’t know why I edited the post. Did I change my opinion? Did I add some context or detail I missed the first time around? Or did I just fix a typo? A reason just makes it easy for people to have more context

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -110 months ago

          That’s the thing though, it’s a paradox.

          Anyone who is considerable enough to use “edit:” for legitimate reasons would not be the people who would be deceptive and change their posts to reflect a new opinion.

          “edit: typo” is essentially just a defense against an imaginary accusation that you were being malicious.

          By all means, edit posts to include extra information as an appendage, but closing with “edit: added info” is not very helpful.

          • Ada
            link
            fedilink
            English
            1410 months ago

            You misunderstand. I’m not doing it so that people know that I made a legit edit, I’m doing it so people know what the legit edit I made is.

            but closing with “edit: added info” is not very helpful.

            Who is doing that or arguing for that? Vague edit descriptions aren’t terribly useful, and I’m not claiming otherwise…

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              110 months ago

              Okay I get you. I thought you were literally typing “edit: typo”, as opposed to something like “edit: she was my sisters friend”

              I guess we both misunderstood each other lol. I wasn’t implying that was your argument, it’s just something I find annoying.

              • Ada
                link
                fedilink
                English
                710 months ago

                I mean, it depends on the context.

                Did I make a post, have a lot of people get upset because I worded my post poorly? In which case, a I might make a clarifying edit like “edit: she was my sisters friend” so that future people that see my post don’t get confused.

                Did I accidentally type “there’s” instead of “theirs”? I’d probably just edit it with “edit: typo”. Not because people care if I made a typo, but because I want people to know that it wasn’t the first type of edit

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  0
                  edit-2
                  10 months ago

                  I agree the context is important, and the examples of rewriting large paragraphs justify clarification, both for new people and returning.

                  But the original point I made was that you don’t need to post “edit: typo” here on Lemmy. We don’t have edited post/comment tags, so nobody would know if it’s just typos

                  It’s really not that big of a deal anyway, I was just thinking of redundant examples of Rediquete to drum up the conversation.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    2210 months ago

    I think it’s polite to tell what you have changed when you edit a post as long as the platform does not have edit history visible (which as far as I can tell Lemmy does not).

    • Reclipse
      link
      fedilink
      310 months ago

      If you add more context to your comment then sure mention it. But I don’t think it’s required for typos.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      1510 months ago

      I wondered the same. There are “Hot” and “Active” categories on the front page but I’m not sure how they work. Perhaps commenting pushes a post further up the “Active” feed?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        11
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        This is my impression too. I see day-old posts with new comments on refresh, so I’m assuming you’re right. Maybe algorithm isn’t the right word, but you get what I mean.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          10
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          It is in fact an algorithm because it’s choosing what posts to put in front of you based on multiple criteria (time since it was posted, votes/number of comments/time since last comment). They are relatively transparent and well documented criteria, though.

          However, it’s not a personalized feed based on your interests and unsolicited data collection, which is what people sometimes mean when they say “the algorithm.”

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            210 months ago

            It’s not just a personalized feed, it’s also that the algorithms of commercial social media are created to keep you engaged for as long as possible, so you see more ads.

            Turns out that people are more engaged with outrage than puppies, so the feed can easily become a super negative thing full of false information, which affects the person viewing and eventually the whole of society. E.g. I am certain that the fact that youtube’s algorithm so easily takes you into the conspiracy territory has caused a lot of people to end up on the fringes of society, causing shit like storming of the Capitol.

    • ChaoticStupid
      link
      10
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      downvoted edit: wait I think I pressed the wrong button

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    1810 months ago

    if you see something which is worthy of a downvote: down vote and move on! Don’t engage with it and feed the algorithm/engament machine so other people are exposed to it when sorting by active.

    Disagree. You should politely state why you disagree. Engagement is good for newer websites like lemmy and you don’t need to be rude or combative to disagree. One of my issues with reddit is when people would get downvoted for making a fair point or observation.

    • @ZozanoOP
      link
      210 months ago

      I really should have clarified this because it seems like a contradiction for me to state that down voting is bad, and to say that when you see something worthy of a downvote, downvote and move on.

      When I say worthy of downvote, I don’t mean a disagreement. I’m talking about people being obviously toxic. If malicious people want a reaction, giving it to them is not productive.

      For example, if I see a post about plant based meals, and a comment states “I’m not convinced that this is really helping the planet, I don’t see a problem with eating meat” - then engage politely.

      But a post like “fucking vegans lol, I’m going to eat 2 steaks tonight” is not worth replying to. Downvote and move on.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    13
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    My take for the fediverse would include:

    • Again, downvote not for disagreement but for content that clearly does not contribute to the discussion. Reason should not be given, as downvoting should be done sparingly and should not require a reason (for most sane human beings).

    • Be aware when interacting cross-instances. Culture, norms, and rules may differ.

    • Unless the instance operator is fine with it, limit your self-content sharing and self-promotion.

    • Remember that most of the fediverse instances are independent and they owe you nothing. The instance operator’s decisions are final.

    • Do not squat names on multiple servers unless it’s what you generally have been using.

    • Cats are still the supreme beings. The fediverse resides on the Internet (assuming that it runs on TCP/IP), so the cat supremacy rule applies.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    1210 months ago

    To be honest building a edit history views makes more sense to me. This project is opensource we can do more than work around.

  • @BraBraBra
    link
    1110 months ago

    Listen, I’ll measure with a fucking banana if I feel like it, okay. Don’t tell me what to do pal.

  • Matthew
    link
    fedilink
    English
    11
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    It’s hard to understand your stance on downvoting, but from what I can tell, you think everyone who downvotes should just downvote and move on without commenting. It’s funny because every post I have seen about downvoting has said the opposite; “Don’t downvote just because you disagree” or “If you downvote, post a comment as to why”…

    I say everyone should stop trying to dictate how other people use their software and stop complaining that "everybody else is doing it wrong"™️. If you have a problem with downvoting, I think you can join an instance that has it disabled.

    • @ZozanoOP
      link
      English
      -1310 months ago

      negative numbers = negative person.

      Negative person + negative person = negative people.

      Negative people * negative people = Reddit

      It’s less about telling you how to use your software, and more about understanding what it takes to cultivate a healthy community.

      It’s too late for reddit, but it’s not too late for us.

      • Matthew
        link
        fedilink
        English
        410 months ago

        Numbers are not indicative of an emotion. It doesn’t matter why someone downvotes. If they are going to be a “negative person” then they will do that regardless. I agree that everyone should make an effort to be kind and avoid being toxic, but saying that downvotes or “negative numbers” have such power is just people putting too much thought into it… Good luck with your crusade. Downvotes can be disabled by an instance admin. I would recommend anyone who cannot handle the negative numbers to consider joining one of those instances.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -410 months ago

          I think you might be underestimating how personal these numbers can be to some people. I’m glad they don’t impact you, but many people, especially the upcoming generation, equate these numbers with their value.

          Big numbers can make people feel validated, that their opinions are valued, or they’re funny.

          Negative numbers may result in disappointment or feelings of rejection.

          I don’t think negative people are “just negative”. Toxicity pervades cultures which allow it to spread. Down voting is sometimes enough to act as a nucleation point. I’ve seen heated arguments start over accusations of down voting, which isn’t isolated to their thread.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              1
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              You said its more of an issue for the individual than the community, how much more?

              I see this as a shared responsibility. The main reason is I’m convinced there’s not much people can do about the issue of validation.

              I see the validation as a double edged sword. Lots of people do legitimately need validation from strangers online, and I’m glad they have communities to go to, to feel better about themselves.

              On the other side of it, is it can form into unhealthy comparison. It’s the reason Instagram stopped showing the number of likes a few years back.

              I think some reddit communities had a good idea for limiting the karma counter to 0, because negative karma definitely contributes to how people feel about themselves and the community.

              I understand many people see it as self-policing, but if you ever visit r/vegan, you will see an extremely gatekeepy community which breeds toxicity. People who step in any direction are taking a step over the line, and it forces compliance via mob instead of allowing mods to handle bad actors.

          • Matthew
            link
            fedilink
            English
            3
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            Exactly, as I said, people should stop taking the numbers so seriously… To say that “it’s just the way it is” doesn’t help address the underlying issue and it won’t stop “negative people” from being negative.

            I’ve seen some of your replies to others on here as you’ve tried to defend your stance and you have resorted to claiming that it’s their problem because of their “conspiracy mindset”. I could just as easily make that same counterargument here but it is offensive and isn’t productive.

            You clearly don’t want to discuss the real issues and just want to shove your opinions down people’s throats.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              -2
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              I don’t know how anyone is supposed to rationalise an intuitive emotion to themselves, let alone to other people. So saying people should just stop taking numbers so seriously is comparable to telling someone they should stop being shy.

              Negative people will be negative for sure, but it really doesn’t take much for an irrational person to become upset. Evidently, you’re a rational person. It is often the case that rational people don’t intuit irrationally minded people (curse of knowledge bias).

              The conspiratorial mindset comment was not directed at anyone here. My point was that people feel that they need to prove their innocence in advance of by explaining why there’s an asterix next to their comment. This is an extremely paranoid behaviour. I was being fallacious by saying it was a conspiratorial mindset, forgive me for being flamboyant.

              As far as defending my opinion and shoving it down peoples throat, I don’t think that’s a charitable interpretation. I simply haven’t been persusuaded, and I think its fine to explain why I don’t see it that way.

              On a similar note, if people should stop taking numbers so seriously, shouldn’t they also stop taking seriously the implications of a stranger who assumes people are editing mundane comments maliciously?

              • Matthew
                link
                fedilink
                English
                4
                edit-2
                10 months ago

                Okay, I just typed up a much better response and then lost it into the Lemmy void, so sorry this will be much more to the point.

                You are arguing two sides of the same issue based on your own personal opinions on each one. The issue being that people have certain psychological or behavioural issues. One: people who feel the need to leave a note on edited posts are paranoid. Two: people get upset by the number of downvotes.

                First, I think your assessment about why people leave a note about their edits is incorrect. Even if they are doing it because they are paranoid, they should try to overcome that and possibly seek real world help. It is also such a minor thing that we should not try to create some “internet law” to justify criticizing them.

                Second, if someone is getting that upset over downvotes, they should try to overcome that, and definitely seek real world help if they cannot cope. Being their gatekeeper will not solve any of these underlying problems and will not stop people from being negative. Again, instance admins can disable downvotes, so this is a non-issue with Lemmy.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  110 months ago

                  The differences between these two things are people are people are either doing it to themselves, or others in the community are responsible.

                  All I was saying in the OP is that people don’t need to clarify that they edited for typos because there’s no way for people to know you edited your post.

                  It’s all well and good to say “these people need help”, they surely do, but the point I’m making is that there is also something we can do, if not for them, for the community generally.

                  In any case, this is not a petition to dictate anything, it’s an appeal to be better to each other, because downvoting everyone who has a different opinion contributes to a bitter community. How much it contributes is speculative, but the value cannot be less than 1.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        110 months ago

        Well if someone constantly has opinions that are very disliked by other people… maybe they just are a negative person and they should be called out for it?

  • ᴇᴍᴘᴇʀᴏʀ 帝
    link
    fedilink
    1010 months ago

    We don’t measure in bananas here.

    You are going to have to come up.with an alternate unit of measurement then. An easily available one too, as I am not keeping a lemming handy for the purposes of scale. Unless it was stuffed… I’m off to eBay, back in a mo.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    910 months ago

    I’m very curious as to what people’s view on etiquette is regarding submitting your own content. I write a weekly newsletter about the fediverse which is pretty relevant to this community for example. But I’m also quite aware of reddiquette thats pretty hesitant on submitting your own stuff, as it can get spammy really fast. Would love to hear.

    • Pat
      link
      fedilink
      8
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Personally, if it’s good content I don’t mind a little self promotion. People won’t see what you made if you don’t share it. Just don’t post it to dozens of communities, that’s when it gets way too spammy. Find one or two you think it would a good fit for and users would find relevant and share it there, as long as that community doesn’t have any rules against promoting your own content.

    • @scutiger
      link
      510 months ago

      I don’t see any problem with that, and posting a weekly update is far from spammy behavior anyway.