Explain Like I'm Five

14646 readers

5 users here now

Simplifying Complexity, One Answer at a Time!

Rules

Be respectful and inclusive.
No harassment, hate speech, or trolling.
Engage in constructive discussions.
Share relevant content.
Follow guidelines and moderators' instructions.
Use appropriate language and tone.
Report violations.
Foster a continuous learning environment.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

-15

The case for down voting/anonymous social negativity to strangers (lemmy.world)

submitted 2 weeks ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

28 comments fedilink hide all child comments

This place seems dead. I was skimming some stuff to make a few posts, after posting a basic casual conversation, the negativity shut me down like usual. I am sitting here with 5 tabs and some interesting stuff, but I'm totally disinterested in trying or even spending any more time here this evening. What value does that add for anyone when this place is dying a slow death of disinterest and low engagement? I never add negativity. I only ignore and block. I never discourage because I know I would be shooting myself in the foot. Why is this not fundamentally standard logic for everyone. If you disagree about opinions, appreciate diversity and ignore or better yet discuss. Anonymous negativity to strangers is psychotic behavior that should never have existed in the first place. It is not normal. It is no different that walking up to a stranger in a supermarket and yelling at them for what they wear or how they talk. That is crazy stupid.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[+] [email protected] -11 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

It is all people exactly like this that I block after low effort comments.

You've only ever made 1 post on this account you commented with. I'm at nearly 400 posts and 4000 comments just on this account and I have several others for propagating communities and trying other instances or to get around blocks like db0, and beehaw. I've tried to encourage positive engagement from the moment I joined Lemmy and actively help build this place while being a liberal voice. You have every right to be a fool. But I should have every right to see you doing it and avoid you in the future as a result.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 2 weeks ago

You certainly have every right to block and ignore me (and anyone else) but if you're going to make a point of it and then throw a tantrum about a dead platform, then you're the one who looks like a fool

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

I mean, can you really fault someone for not engaging frequently if they are browsing? Especially when it comes to posts, not everyone has a reason to post. The stuff I'd post is niche so thinking about the best place is tedious and previous attempts have been disappointing.

I'll block content/communities that I don't care anything about, but I'd rather not block users. I don't want to block interaction with someone just because I disliked one aspect of what they post/comment. I mean if you have that moment multiple times with someone (or if it's really bad), understandable.

The case: to me, a downvote is for something not worth a reply. Something I think is not beneficial (or has a context issue) that will likely not be changed with a response. Particularly if it seems in bad faith/taste (especially one I've seen before).

The opposite is also true, If it is worth a reply it probably isn't worth a downvote.

Though I also think about votes within their context, where I think the number should be. Which means I may refrain or even retract a downvote, given how others vote. Similarly I may upvote something I otherwise wouldn't.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 weeks ago

Lol, you're a riot.

You can't even see your own hypocrisy.