It is objectively a lot more male than Reddit or other social media. Reddit has many issues, but lack of women is not one of them.

  • SuspciousCarrot78@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago
    1. Lemmy is by and large populated with ex-Redditors, who bring with them some of the same hivemind on certain topics. Eg: Lemmy is very anti-AI or nuanced discussions thereon. Nuclear is bad, etc. Makes bad faith discussions on certain topics almost certain.
    2. As everywhere else - there’s too much “you’re either on my team or you’re against me” - though notably less than in other spaces
    3. Upvote / downvote counts: these should be yeeted into the garbage pile of history.

    Things Lemmy does well

    1. Less performative engagement.
    2. Less American (but arguably that’s still too much for some).
    3. Despite it all, a measure of civility still exists. Rare.
    4. You can create your own instance and be ungovernable :)
    5. No algorithmic engagement bullshit (so far)
    6. I don’t feel like I have to walk on eggshells every time I post something.

    I personally find Lemmy a great deal more pleasant to interact on, with strong pre 2010 forum vibes and I feel that’s a good thing. YMMV

    TL;DR: There’s a lot less “look at me, look at me!” on Lemmy and it’s all the better for it.

    • ptu@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      11 hours ago

      On a side-note, I think the past tense of yeet is yote. Good analysis nevertheless.

    • JohnnyEnzyme@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      15 hours ago

      Upvote / downvote counts: these should be yeeted into the garbage pile of history.

      Still not exactly sure what “yeeted” means, but I like how upvotes & downvotes tend to bring quality content to the fore, and I even like them as a permanent record. They’re not very useful of course, but having the motivation to permanently increasing my totals is useful for sharing good content and communicating in good faith. At least for me.

      • TrackinDaKraken@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Depending on the topic, I know that if I sort by top, I’ll find my people at the top, or the bottom. So, it’s useful for that reason. This was more true on Reddit, but it happens here, too.

        Paying too much attention to the numbers I think will push people toward the normal take, whether we like to admit it or not. So, it’s best not to track your own stats too seriously. Just say your piece and let the chips fall where they may.

      • SuspciousCarrot78@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        15 hours ago

        Right - that’s me trying to hip and cool (“how do, fellow kids”).

        Yeet - https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Yeet

        I completely disagree about the upvotes / down votes thing btw. I think, platonically, that’s what they were supposed to do.

        Pragmatically, they’ve end up being more a social proof / opinion suppression / brigading tool.

        That - and infinite scroll - are among the worst sins introduced by social media. ICBW and YMMV.

        • MonkeMischief@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          9 hours ago

          Nah I think you’re on the money. As someone with ADHD, those worthless little updoots and infinity-scrolling are almost as bad as any algorithm!

          ICBW and YMMV

          YTMND. 👍

        • JohnnyEnzyme@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          15 hours ago

          Yeet - https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Yeet

          Okay, thanks. I can never seem to remember it, maybe because it feels so unnatural. Maybe it would help if I knew where it came from, though. *shrug*

          Pragmatically, they’ve end up being more a social proof / opinion suppression / brigading tool.

          That seems exceptionally pessimistic to me, but maybe you have more insight in to all that than I do. Personally I think multiple things can be true about upvotes / downvotes, some useful, some harmful perhaps.

          In any case, there is no debate that upvotes are useful and valuable to me when it comes to posting and commenting.

          • SuspciousCarrot78@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            15 hours ago

            Well, I remember ye olden days of Usenet - we mostly got along without them, and without some of the issues they seem to cause.

            If they’re helpful to you, thumbs up (ha). I do wish they were an optional extra instead of proxy dopamine button (based on the way some seem to use them). There’s actually a good read on why they (and reddit in general) skew toxic -

            https://jacobdesforges.com/you-should-quit-reddit-distribution-wide/

            • JohnnyEnzyme@piefed.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              14 hours ago

              Well, I remember ye olden days of Usenet - we mostly got along without them, and without some of the issues they seem to cause.

              Things change, though. Upvote/downvote was one of the many things Reddit and other places trialed over the years, and based on the success, stuck with it. Me, I barely spent any time on Usenet, but it occurs to me that the userbase was probably smaller. A much, much larger userbase probably fits better with upvote/downvote, so the comparison there is likely skewed, methinks.

              ‘Dopamine rush’ is exactly right, and I think it’s useful and informational, similar to the way that people react to your statements and ideas in real life. I do think they can have an ‘echo chamber’ effect and help promote the problem that a popular thing or opinion can be completely wrong, but to me that just means that upvotes/downvotes aren’t perfect, not that they should be completely discarded.

              https://jacobdesforges.com/you-should-quit-reddit-distribution-wide/

              Not sure what you want me to do with a link to a book, but I don’t even agree with the premise of the title sentence. Reddit is still very useful to me, and I know of no other place that replicates the variety of content, there.

              • SuspciousCarrot78@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                13 hours ago

                Ok, but I think you’re conflating two separate things; the usefulness of Reddit as a content index (which I agree is still unmatched) with whether the upvote/downvote mechanic is net positive. One doesn’t need to quit Reddit to acknowledge that the voting system consistently produces pathological outcomes at scale. “Brigading” is a literal Reddit phenomena

                The Usenet comparison wasn’t really about scale. It was about the incentive structure. Upvotes/downvotes don’t just surface good content, they gamify participation in a way that systematically advantages emotionally resonant, tribally safe content over nuanced or contrarian takes. That’s not a flaw in implementation , it’s a feature of the design.

                And “people react to your statements in real life” isn’t really analogous. In real life, social feedback is contextual, bidirectional, and has friction. A downvote is anonymous, effortless, and carries zero accountability. The asymmetry matters.

                The link is to a book (available via Libby if you don’t want to pay for it) in case you wanted a primary source. In summary: Desforges’ core argument is that Reddit exploits operant conditioning to keep users chasing high-value posts through a flood of mediocre ones and that even people who claim not to care about karma are still shaped by it. It’s worth a read.

                Justin Rosenstein - one of the engineers who actually built Facebook’s Like button - has publicly said it produces what he called “bright dings of pseudo-pleasure,” and has since restricted his own use of it. Leah Pearlman, who co-created it with him, has said the same. These aren’t outside critics; these are the people who built the thing.

                https://www.timesofisrael.com/years-on-creators-of-facebook-like-button-give-idea-thumbs-down/

                End of the day: if you find it personally useful, I believe you. I think the problem is in aggregate behaviour. Apes together…dumb.

                • JohnnyEnzyme@piefed.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  12 hours ago

                  Ok, but I think you’re conflating two separate things

                  I feel like they’re distinctly separate things, and I thought I’d communicated as much. Oh, well.

                  …the voting system consistently produces pathological outcomes at scale.

                  That seems like… a little much. I do agree that upvotes/downvotes indeed gamify the system, but on the whole would say that the end-effect on Reddit results in a big bunch of hoomons acting in typical hoomon ways, which is with deep undercurrents of fickle, ignorant, selfish, feel-good behavior.

                  The Usenet comparison wasn’t really about scale. It was about the incentive structure.

                  Yeah, I get that, but I do observe that there are advantages to upvote/downvote that indeed work better on a larger scale. I’m not sure they’re really needed on a smaller scale.

                  I’d say I agree with most of the things you wrote, but remain unconvinced that upvote/downvote is so absolutely toxic as to merit tossing. And of course, I don’t think it’s going to happen, anyway.

                  Aggregate behaviour amongst naked apes? Yeah, I would tend to agree. Now what?

                  • SuspciousCarrot78@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    12 hours ago

                    That seems like… a little much. I do agree that upvotes/downvotes indeed gamify the system, but on the whole would say that the end-effect on Reddit results in a big bunch of hoomons acting in typical hoomon ways, which is with deep undercurrents of fickle, ignorant, selfish, feel-good behavior.

                    I’d argue that’s a restatement of my position with better adjectives :)

                    I’d say I agree with most of the things you wrote, but remain unconvinced that upvote/downvote is so absolutely toxic as to merit tossing. And of course, I don’t think it’s going to happen, anyway.

                    Aggregate behaviour amongst naked apes? Yeah, I would tend to agree. Now what?

                    Well, 2 options:

                    1. Kill all the apes (or just wait 15 more minutes)

                    2. Enjoy Lemmy

                    I’m trending towards 2 myself

    • Samskara@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      17 hours ago

      eggshells

      Many, especially political and news communities ban opinions that are mainstream in the Democratic Party because they aren’t left enough. If they are powermods, they will happily ban you from dozens of communities and instances.