Fediverse memes

Specifically the episodes "2010" and "2001."

That can explain twitter

Doesn't that system make for incredibly obnoxious comment sections consisting only of people disagreeing and complaining + argumentative responders?

Normal comment sections are often bad enough already

I'm going to disagree with you there, because they love banning people who disapprove of their posts.

When you have an upvote/downvote structure, there is an incentive to not go against the grain and just post stuff that’s considered “acceptable” in the local community.

Coward behaviour, post your hot takes, nobody knows who the fuck any of us are it's not like there's any actual consequences here. Get banned and spin up a new account on another instance or 9 ffs, the downvotes can't hurt you

Not everyone treats the votes the same way as well. Some people downvote because they don’t agree with the content, the poster, just because they sound disagreeable or simply because the post is too much to read. You can apply the same myriad of methods to upvotes. Not one motivator is the same.

Great argument to not give them any weight, like by disabling them to protect fragile egos

When my instance switched from 0.19.3 - which your lemmy.world is still running on (awaiting 0.19.6 iirc for reasons) - to 0.19.5, downvotes became hidden by default and I had to turn them on specifically.

I turned them on bc for me, more information is better - e.g. I like to distinguish between e.g. "1 upvote" that has not been seen by anyone yet (perhaps due to server sync issues, which just happened to me yesterday on startrek.website - e.g. my post has different numbers of comments and differences in voting numbers depending on which instance you view it from; such issues are still somewhat common on Lemmy, often due to keeping up with Lemmy.world that has 80% of the userbase, though 0.19.6 promises a reprieve iirc), vs. 1 net upvote that is made up of X upvotes + X downvotes.

A lot of my posts tend to be controversial for some reason - e.g. this video that points out bias in news media reporting (towards more "exciting" content that sells rather than actual facts) got only 6 upvotes (above the default +1) and 5 downvotes. So... it's actual information to know that (a) people actually did see it, rather than it still sitting at just 2, and (b) as many people didn't like it as liked it, though far more people simply ignored.

We cannot make people like things - even (literally) award-winning content that arguably they "should". All we can do is be sensitive to people's reactions. Like the man vs. bear debate - perhaps choosing the bear is "silly"? Then again, is it, really, truly, and anyway it's not our call to make, only others to choose as they wish. At which point, it's at least good to know what people's opinions are?

yeah it was a trip lol

I was there, Gandalf...

Hrm, I suppose that would depend: did the person who said that really know somehow that he was a pedo (especially if it predated all the news stories then how would he? maybe the news stories were rerun a second time), or was it just a wild guess that turned out to be correct?

Anyway yeah, not many people seem to actually care about the truth - it is often painful, always seems to be difficult, almost always goes against the fantasy stories that we tell ourselves, etc.

I have never known Jon Stewart not to be. Unless he says in advance that he might be. His discipline, his willingness to listen to feedback, his dedication... all of that means that his wrong thoughts tend not to make their way on the air. Although this might have been before Jon Stewart's airing of that episode?

I suppose it could have been wrong - like if Biden really did just have a cold or some such. But either way, the logical foundation that the article set forth intrigued me.

Or the app.

I see nothing wrong with that plan.:-)

Strange... it works for me