• Walk_blesseD@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
    0·
    23 hours ago

    Two things can be true at once. .ml is overrun with tankies and .world is infested with shitlibs, and they both facilitate bad moderation practices.

  • thanks AV@lemmy.world
    0·
    1 day ago

    I joined .world because that was the one recommended to me when I left reddit but as far as I’m aware none of my posts or comments have ever been removed, nor have I gotten any mod mail or warnings so… idk.

    Lemmy has been infinitely more open to expression without restriction. Even if one of the instances are ban happy tankies at least I don’t get a sitewide IP ban for correctly pointing out the hypocrisy of worldnews mods allowing genocidal rhetoric as long as it’s against Arabs.

  • NateNate60@lemmy.world
    0·
    2 days ago

    Honestly, all Lemmy instances are pretty echo-chamber-y because like all social media, people come here to feel and not think. The only difference between here and other places is that for many users the echo chamber aligns more closely with their own views so it’s tolerable.

    • cm0002@lemmy.worldOP
      0·
      2 days ago

      I think the term echo chamber has gotten a little too broad IMO, most of human history has been filled with “echo chambers” churches, towns, villages, schools could all be considered echo chambers at one time or another

      Where things really shit the bed is when algorithm enforced echo chambers hit the scene and super charged it lol

      • kazaika@lemmy.world
        0·
        22 hours ago

        Where algorithm on lemmy? I thought the feed was engagement based, or not? Also having an account on an instance doesn’t mean you consume necessarily filtered content as you make your feed from the stuff you follow. As far as i’m concerned that is what’s great about it.

      • NateNate60@lemmy.world
        0·
        2 days ago

        Let me rephrase what I mean. I guess I really am talking about the effect of enforced groupthink that platforms with voting like most social media sites cause, advertently or otherwise. Despite efforts to the contrary, voting here and elsewhere has always been an expression of approval or disapproval. So what tends to happen is that if someone posts something against the grain, people downvote it, and then it escalates from there. These numbers, despite their meaninglessness, were designed to trigger an emotional response—positive when high and negative when low. It results in the discouragement of the posting of anything that the user might think to be controversial. It gives a feeling that differences in opinions are unwelcome. And that’s really the problem with the way modern social media networks are designed.

        We associate (probably not consciously), high scores and vote totals with things being “good”, and low scores with things being bad, when they really correspond to “popular” and “unpopular”, respectively. The algorithm is suggesting to its users that popular opinions are good and unpopular opinions are bad. This is a fine way to sort content like animal videos or funny dash cam GIFs but it’s a really terrible way to sort opinions.

        Lemmy is little better than Reddit in this regard, because Reddit punishes its users for having “low karma” by taking away their ability to post and comment, but I still think that voting systems in general are a pretty bad way to score and recommend content.