Elkaki123

joined 2 years ago
[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago

If you encountered a community like that, maybe they needed those, there is a reason they are there and people keep posting.

For the immaculate example, see r/askhistorians where I guarantee your answers will get removed even when properly sourced since it has to do with how tight their quality control is, which that was needed to make one of the best communities out there.

Rules are not a reddit especific thing, once communities grow bigger over here more and more will develop and perfect rules that better suit their identities, it is a necessary part of this kind of social media.

Your post kindd of reminds me of another post today where someone pointed out at 4 deleted comments, with no context and basically said "reddit doesn't respect freedom of speech, see how far mods have fallen since the blackouts" which was useless circlejerking, communities are no different that subreddits in that particular sense, moderation and rules will still be present here, a mod deleting your post has nothing to do with them being on reddit or not.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Not saying you are wrong, since it is currently imposible to do here, but I don't think the federated nature of usernames has anything yo do with if they receive a notification or bot since over at mastodon you can tag people properly and they are notified.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I might be misunderstanding something, but you are talking about a tag (same as a private note over mastodon or a profile note in discord)

At least it looks that way because of this

Add the ability to tag users, so a title i give him will be next to his name.

What this user is asking is if you can write someone's name on a post and for that petson to receive a notification that they have been mentioned.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Come on what is this elitism, almost everyone has an Instagram, it's not that huge of a leap to just press the button that says threats, it's not a sign of stupidity.

Seriously there is some heavy gatekeeping and elitism going around whenever there is a conversation around META

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago

Agree, by design the fediverse should be able to resist whatever the supposed harm is from META, I don't really agree with privacy concerns since everything on the fediverse is public, especially on kbin and lemmy, almost everything is already available to whomever eants it, there is no need to set up this hugr machination since they can already accomplish it so much easier.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 2 years ago (4 children)

I keep asking but haven't gotten an answer, why must instances that block meta also block those that federate with META? Wouldn't blocking META be enough, as you wouldn't see their posta, nor users, nor comments in any way after blovking the domain?

Is this punitive or is yhere a reason I'm mising?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago

Jajaja I thought about that while typing it out but I still dont believe this is about EEE, Meta hasnt operated with that mindset yet in other spaces from what I know and I feel this is more that a kneejerk reaction of people not liking big corporations associating it with the idea that big corps want to kill the freedom that these spaces bring to online communities.

But I believe in the design of the fediverse and the resilience of the people, I dont think that a few platforms hoarding the big majority threaten the entirety of the fediverse, as long as people can self host their own instances since we can ensure there will always be spaces for communities like this, even in worse case scenarios like Meta just having so many features that other platforms cant compete in those terms I still feel a niche of the same people that are building this today are going to stick with it, and thus we can keep this going even if we are forced to defederate at a later date or they defederate us.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago

(TLDR: if you only read one thing make it so its the last paragraph, it is the main argument anyways the first part was more of the rationale behind it)

I disagree with your notion. Although I feel there are two meanings for gatekeeping clashing. First there is gatekeeping in a traditional sense, which is filtering. As in you need to meet certain requirements, be it that your post sticks to the rules, moderation would technically be gatekeeping here as it rejects the content made by the people who dont adhere to what the community has determined. In this sense it is good

Then there is the "urban" meaning of the world (not sure if that is the word in english for popular use of words) where here in the internet gatekeeping is more referred to keeping something "pure" by excluding people out, or for keeping a sense of elitism. I feel almost all fandoms went through this phase during the early 2010s late 2000s, just as an example if you ever said you liked anime but had only watched shōnen you would have been mocked by every single person on the forum. Gaming communities have also been incredibly toxic in this regards, need I remind you of the entire GamerGate era...

Sure this two meanings can conflate, but by dividing I can explain why I am opposed to the second attitude while not minding the first. The gatekeeping by the communities, which is necessary as you say to keep good communities is certainly good. Of course we need moderation and rules to make communities work, even really heavy moderation and exclusions can be good as long as they are rational and serve a particular purpose like what r/askhistorias did by removing 99% of comments.

But the attitude of "things are better now because you have to be really smart to be here" is a stupid elitist notion, change it a bit and its the same argument that has been used to gatekeep hobbies so strongly instead of fostering someone's interest in a thing into something better. Here what we need is not to "keep those people out" but instead we need to embrace them and push them to make better content. Simple as, we designate the rules and we create the content that becomes the standard. Communities are far better shaped by setting a standard of appropriate conduct that people who are joining replicate instead of outright denying some people because they are "normies" that will ruin things for us.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago

Or if you really care about not seeing "mass appeal social media content", like, just don't join those communities????

Like the whole "it's better if those people aren't on this platform" is so stupid when you consider the entire aspect of fragmentation going on for federated communities..

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 years ago

Embrace, extend and extinguish.

It was a more common tactic back in the day for tech giants to destroy competition omfor open software specifically.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 years ago (10 children)

I'm with you on this one, in a vacuum I don't really have a problem with the term "normie" but here it is completely being used as gatekeeping.

This whole meta controversy has really caused some brain rot, a lot of people talk about this place as if it's better because it "gatekeeps". They say they enjoy this place because it is niche and doesn't have the "below room temperature IQ posters" (actual quote I saw)

I don't like this attitude, I really don't like it. It is way to common on the internet, especially for hobby communities to have this attitude.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Are we going to start pretending this is something new to bash on reddit?

Given the lack of context the mods might be in the right here, what is up with the expectation you can just barge up to a community and say whatever you want, there are rules for a reason.

Sure let's circlejerk

view more: ‹ prev next ›