They stopped that last month or so.
Leftist would not consider anything neutral until all property is dismantled.
There’s this ethos of constantly tweaking the intricate rules of the system to govern users’ behavior – which in a way I applaud – but if you read the SE “meta” discussions where this process plays out, there’s a vibe which I personally often find uncomfortable. It’s more noticeable on the smaller technical SE sites, where you come to recognise people by name. A lot of the high rollers are very focused on proving how smart they are (according to the rules of the game) (which they set), sometimes to the point of being flat-out assholes to low-score users, and it feels to me like there’s more interest in keeping that 1% on top than in helping out people who have growing to do.
(I gather Wikipedia has similar problems)
It’s less of an issue with Disqus because Disqus isn’t nearly so gamified, but I believe the same mindset is there. There’s a commendable interest in having good rules, but I dunno… are communities only for people who are really good at following rules?
/r/latestagecapitalism is so far up its own ass it bans folks for positing what stage late stage capitalism occupies. Anyone stupid/crazy enough to seek redemption has to perform the online equivalent of reciting the little red book.
I’m sure thedonald is just as bad the other way, but I’m not going to bother finding out.
Oh, and FWIW, the late stage is the latest. Always the latest.
It kind of comes down to whether the purpose of a community is to achieve a goal or to just provide a social space, or a combination of both.
I’ve been on purely social forums and they’re okay and honestly don’t require a ton of rule-followers other than super basic ‘don’t wreck the site’ stuff. But if you’re trying to accomplish a goal as StackExchange and most Subreddits are (e.g. the homeautomation subreddit is to discuss and accomplish things around homeautomation, etc) then rule-followers ARE required, to some lesser or greater degree.
I always wanted a site called Blueit, but knew it would fuck up and not last long.
I’d say that it calls for “rule following” rather than “rule followers”. As Exhibit A regarding the difference, I’d invite you to check out Stack Exchange’s “Workplace” site, which could be a resource for navigating the corporate world but is mostly just a place to get yelled at by people who’ve run out of places to stick passive-aggressive notes in their office kitchen. Or the “Interpersonal Skills” site, where residents of the autistic spectrum hector each other to behave more like emotionless Mormon androids of the 1950s. I’m willing to bet that both those communities have driven away plenty of wise, polite individuals who could have offered a great deal of needed guidance to their users.
All of em are in a way taking a “tech can solve human nature” approach from various angles. Unfortunately we see time and time again that this doesn’t work. Tech can have an amplification effect on the good and bad parts of human nature but doesn’t change it. Sometimes we interpret this as “look how horrible the world is, see? right there on social media is the proof” when in fact the good and bad are the same as before.
I can’t do 4Chan. I spend too much money on soap trying to get myself clean afterwards. BB just makes me roll my eyes sometimes; 4Chan makes me queasy.
Stack Exchange can be a great resource. But its punishingly strict reputation system (not to mention general elitism) can make it very unwelcoming to newcomers.
As an example, I wanted to participate in Stack Overflow. I set up an account and found I could do little more than try to answer questions. I couldn’t upvote or downvote anything, or even leave sub-comments. I had to actually answer some questions, wait for those answers to get noticed and to earn reputation points. Even now I still don’t have enough reputation points to downvote anything. This was all taking too long and I eventually said fuck it and stopped actively participating.
I don’t think you can balance out one bunch of internet weirdos with another one. That’s like doing too much coke and then trying to balance it out by taking a handful of valium.
You should do like half internet forums and half petting cats, that’s what keeps me sane!
Oh yeah, I’m in the same boat in that regard. I got the impression the primary way to gain points was to post questions but it seems like most of the questions I have have already been frequently and sufficiently answered so fat chance of getting any reputation that way.
But I do find it to be an invaluable resource when I’m struggle with programming topics so I can live without participating for now.
How do you distinguish between a site being a “media echo chamber” versus an actual tool for organization and communicating ideas? I don’t know what your experience has been like, but I don’t find places - either online or in meatspace - where I feel free to discuss or succeed in engaging people about making the world a better place. So I respect people’s efforts to build communities.
Judging by what I’ve seen of leftists on reddit, I predict it will most than likely go okay for a while, slowly getting more and more toxic and exclusionary as time goes on, before imploding due to in-fighting.
I’m 50/50 on if I’m being optimistic by putting it in such a way that it will be a slow descent, and not a freefall from the moment it starts. Further 50/50 on if it’s implosion is caused by some reddit-style media attention over something shitty they do - while not a statement on the left in general, reddit leftists in particular seem to still have a lot of problems with racism, sexism, anti-semitism, transphobia, and other forms of bigotry. They’re not as bad as reddit on the whole, but that’s a bar to pass that’s so low, you need specialized geologists to locate it.
I’m not sure I’ve ever understood that impulse. Like try to imagine some one arguing that this pointed stick is going be the end of human cruelty. Or movable type is going to usher in a utopia.
I don’t believe in any particular “human nature”. But humans can certainly be modified by technology. How about trying to form human brains based more upon expanded orangutan or bonobo structures, to reduce that chimpish violent ego assholism?
What boggles me about human nature advocates is that they acknowledge physical changes to people are possible. Even most stodgy people who decry some human behavior as “unnatural” will still enjoy other unnatural conveniences like cars and medicine. Yet there is an insistence in many quarters that the biology of the human brain/mind cannot possibly be changed, so we shouldn’t even try.
It might not be a panacea, but you try a few things and see what works. Humans are a syncretic colonies of nanotech, they are anything but immutable.
And you attract the ire of the elites who will rudely chastise you for posting duplicate questions if you try this route.
I’m in the same boat as you. I often don’t have any questions to ask, so that reduces my opportunity for points. I world rarely have the time to compose thoughtful answers to things I do know, and when I do, they are often already sufficiently answered, or my answers go unnoticed (or buried below well the lede).
It is indeed a great reference but I find the barrier to entry for actually participating to be just too high unless I am willing to dedicate a lot of time and energy to the site. I guess this can be a good thing? It keeps the riff raff away, but it also drives away casuals.
I can’t definitively answer that, but I think creating a social media platform that, from the outset, you declare to be only for people from one ideology (in this case, leftist) firmly plants it in the echo chamber category.
I have also encountered people who have referred to Boing Boing as a hive of leftism, yet here we are. Also, without knowing more I don’t interpret “a leftist alternative” as saying “only leftist”. There are very few places hospitable to us, so for us it can be an alternative, but inclusive of others who don’t strictly need such an alternative. Not unlike how a queer, feminist, or indigenous rights fora might exist to make a space safe for such people, their discussions and concerns - but not necessarily exclude other good-faith participants. I would have guessed this practice to be sufficiently understood, that I am surprised by the dismissive attitudes here.
Besides, the far-ish left is quite far from being an ideologically homogeneous ecosystem!