• 0 Posts
  • 15 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
Cake day: June 24th, 2023
  • Unhappily_Coerced@kbin.socialtoLemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world•Oh dear
    04·
    1 year ago

    I understand the repetitive reasoning behind your perspective. However, the problem lies in your understanding, or lack there of, of misinformation.

    Who do you propose is the arbiter of what qualifies as fact or fiction? Because you make it sound like you are qualified to know everything about everything with your ability to downvote… Or, do you think which ever argument is the most convincing to you, that’s who is obviously correct…? Or are you more simple than even that and think, “this information is on TV so it MUST be correct!”

    When you have a thousand qualified professionals saying the same thing, yet another thousand qualified professionals saying the opposite, what then becomes misinformation, disinformation, or malinformation? Are you still wearing a cloth mask outdoors and getting your boosters?

    I love how everybody throws around comparisons to fascism and Nazis these days. We could focus on the left or the right and easily create a list of all the things we’ve done that was similar to things Nazis did. It really isn’t hard to do…

    During World War II, Democratic President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed Executive Order 9066, which led to the forced relocation and internment of around 120,000 Japanese Americans.

    Under the Democratic administrations of Presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson, the FBI’s Counterintelligence Program (COINTELPRO) targeted various political groups, including civil rights activists, anti-war organizations, and socialist and communist groups.

    The Democratic administration of President Woodrow Wilson used the Espionage Act of 1917 to suppress dissent during World War I. The act was employed to prosecute individuals who criticized the war effort, including socialists, pacifists, and anarchists.

    Democrat Bill Clinton invoked executive privilege to withhold information in various investigations, including the Whitewater controversy and the Monica Lewinsky scandal.

    Democratic President Barack Obama faced criticism for the use of drone strikes and the extensive use of executive orders.

    The Democratic administration of President Barack Obama faced criticism for its continuation and expansion of surveillance programs, such as the National Security Agency’s mass surveillance programs revealed by whistleblower Edward Snowden.

    We could talk about how Presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, continued and expanded the “War on Drugs” policies. Which disproportionately affected minority communities and led to mass incarceration, raising concerns about civil liberties and racial inequality…

    Good old “Drug War Joe”.

    one side consistently and systematically exploits weaknesses in that philosophy to spread misinformation and bigotry.

    Or you know, we could accept the facts that both sides are similarly as evil as the other. Instead of just pointing fingers and creating more disinformation.

  • Unhappily_Coerced@kbin.socialtoLemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world•Oh dear
    03·
    1 year ago

    Your comment clearly demonstrates your own bias. You are engaging in what is known as collective punishment or collective blame, unjustly punishing or mistreating individuals who may not have been involved in any wrongdoing, simply because they hold different beliefs or opinions than you and your group. This approach completely disregards the principles of individual responsibility and fairness, ignoring their individual actions and intentions.

    Until an individual user posts racist or hateful speech, they deserve either the discussion they are looking for or, if you don’t have anything constructive to say, ignore them and don’t say anything at all.

    It is crucial for you to recognize and acknowledge your bias, as it undermines the credibility and objectivity of your argument. By allowing it to dictate your actions, you are not fostering a constructive environment for discussion. You aren’t considering their merit or engaging in meaningful dialogue.

    It’s important to remember that a person can hold bigoted views even if they actively advocate for social justice. Prejudiced or intolerant views towards a particular group of people, regardless of whether they are based on race, religion, gender, or any other factor, are equally unacceptable.

    Remember, it is important to approach discussions with an open mind, respecting the diversity of opinions and perspectives. Only by doing so can we create an environment conducive to productive conversations and the exchange of ideas. Otherwise, we might as well create echo chamber magazines for everything. As an example, instead of “Politics” we’ll need Left Politics, Right Politics, Center Politics, Top Left Politics, Top Right Politics, Bottom Left Politics, Bottom Right Politics… etc.

  • Unhappily_Coerced@kbin.socialtoLemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world•Oh dear
    03·
    1 year ago

    I’ve been pondering the concept of Reddit “karma,” and I believe it’s time for a serious discussion about its true nature and the impact it has on our communities. I’ve written multiple posts about this previously here on kbin (https://kbin.social/m/RedditMigration/t/95140/Dearest-developers-Stop-reinventing-the-wheel) with very mixed results in the engagement. Though I am still working on refining the argument.

    While the idea behind karma is to provide users with a reputation score or social credit, I’ve noticed that it doesn’t necessarily align with those intentions. Instead, it often serves as a reinforcement for users to stay within their comfort zones and echo chambers, stifling diverse perspectives and constructive dialogue.

    One of the main issues I’ve observed is the tendency for downvoting to occur when a user expresses an opinion that goes against the prevailing sentiment within a particular community. Even if the opinion is well-thought-out, respectful, and contributes to meaningful conversations, it becomes a target for downvotes. This behavior discourages users from engaging or expressing differing viewpoints.

    It’s disheartening to witness how users can manipulate the system out of spite. Some individuals go as far as visiting other users’ profiles and downvoting their past posts to deliberately lower their karma score. This kind of behavior further emphasizes how the current karma system is more of a reflection of how often a user participates in echo chambers that align with their views, rather than an accurate measure of their quality engagement or contribution to the community.

    With that in mind, I propose that we reconsider the name of the point system to better reflect its actual usage. Here are a few alternative names that encapsulate the behavior we often see:

    • Echo Chamber Score: Highlighting the tendency to reward users who stick to echo chambers and discourage exploration of different perspectives.

    • Bias Points: The system measures a user’s inclination to conform to specific biases or ideological groups.

    • Conformity Score: The score reflects a user’s adherence to the prevailing opinions within specific communities, rather than their engagement.

    I believe a change in the name would serve as a wake-up call for the community, highlighting the importance of open-mindedness and respectful discourse. It would encourage users to think beyond their echo chambers and engage in meaningful conversations, even if they hold different opinions.

    I’ve previously discussed how it would be more beneficial to leave the rep system in place, but keep the scores hidden to everyone besides the user of that profile. Another thing to think about is the way Steam has a rep system regarding VAC Bans. Instead of banning a profile completely, just some big red text on their profile noting which game or community there were banned from and how often.

    I’m eager to hear your thoughts on this matter. What are your suggestions for improving the system to foster more open and constructive dialogue?

  • Unhappily_Coerced@kbin.socialtoLemmy.World Announcements@lemmy.world•Hello! Can we normalize a few things?
    02·
    1 year ago

    Please keep in mind this is something I’ve written in regards to all of these various social platforms, not just kbin…

    Hiding Voting Metrics:
    Voting metrics inadvertently lead to conformity and discourage users from expressing genuine opinions. Users should feel more comfortable sharing their thoughts and perspectives without fear of judgment or backlash.

    Removing Emoji-Based Reactions:
    The current practice of using emoji reactions as a means of interaction lacks depth and context. These reactions do not provide any insight into why a user liked, disliked, or loved a post… This change would promote more genuine interaction and create a space for nuanced conversations.

    Discouraging Clout Chasing Behaviors:
    Platforms can implement measures that limit the emphasis on popularity metrics. Introduce alternative ways to measure influence and impact (insightful comments, fostering discussions, valuable contributions). By shifting the focus from superficial metrics to meaningful engagement, platforms can create an environment that encourages authentic participation.

    Promoting Content Quality and Relevance:
    Hiding voting metrics and mitigating clout chasing behaviors allows platforms to prioritize quality and relevance. Engagement, interactions, relevance, and authenticity is used to determine the visibility of content. This approach ensures that valuable and meaningful content receives recognition, while reducing the emphasis on arbitrary popularity metrics.

    Recognizing the Limitations of Memes:
    While memes can be entertaining and lighthearted, they often lack the depth. Memes, while humorous, rarely foster in-depth discussions or promote the exchange of diverse perspectives. By highlighting the limitations of relying on meme-based content, platforms can encourage users to move beyond superficial engagement and embrace more substantive interactions.

    This approach optimizes content organization by utilizing horizontal space before continuing vertically. This method ensures that users can browse through a larger number of posts allowing users to quickly scan and explore popular posts while maintaining a clear overview of the content available. Reorganizing the UX of platforms by adopting a mass display approach for content organization brings numerous benefits. It optimizes content visibility, promotes content diversity, and streamlines content organization. By presenting the most interacted-with content side-by-side (instead of most popular on top) and utilizing horizontal space effectively, platforms create a dynamic and engaging user experience.

    This reimagined platform design enhances content discoverability, improves user engagement, and fosters a thriving online community that values quality and relevance.

    There are tons of other aspects of this to discuss but I won’t bother diving into them (new and unpopular posts receiving recognition, front page content dying off due to less interaction based on time decay, etc etc)