this post was submitted on 03 Jun 2023
113 points (97.5% liked)

Lemmy

12524 readers
21 users here now

Everything about Lemmy; bugs, gripes, praises, and advocacy.

For discussion about the lemmy.ml instance, go to [email protected].

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Rule #2 is possibly our most important one:

Be respectful. Everyone should feel welcome here.

Learn to disagree without being rude or disrespectful.

It can be difficult sometimes, since western social media thrives on collective outrage, and they knowingly ingrain this into us for years. But please do adhere to this rule, and it will make this place much more enjoyable.

We will not hesitate to issue temp bans (usually a day or two) for those who make everyone's experience unpleasant.Hit the report button if you see this behavior.

Thanks!

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago

Lots of redditors are coming out of echo-chambers. In fact most of reddit has become one starting from a suffocating top-down control.

They've forgotten how Reddit used to be and so are astounded at how "uncomfortable" Lemmy is given its NON-pyramid like structure.

The discomfort is how the world and free speech needs to be and I'm a non-white Muslim typing this.

None of us is 100% right so we should always be exposed to other POVs and question ourselves to keep ourselves in check and evolve in objective ways.

I hope Lemmy keeps it this way and the money doesn't corrupt things as it always does. Believe you me, advertisers and nefarious actors are already reaching out to Lemmy authors to do exactly that.

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

First thing I read on Lemmy and it's like I've found emotionally intelligent people finally.

I saw the same thing on Mastadon, just normal people capable of handling their emotions.

Western social media (and television) is promoting the worst in people and it can make users believe everyone is insane. So it's very nice to see this being posted.

Thanks!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

I really like the fediverse. I made a Mastodon account after Elon bought Twitter, because it was pretty clear he was disingenuous. On one hand, he said he wanted to "promote free speech" but on the other hand it seemed like he was focusing on one particular kind of speech (i.e. bigotry). It's nice to see posts like this saying that lemmy hopes to be a different form of social media.

But... I can't help but feel like there may be a similar disingenuous story going on, as much as I hate to say it. I want the fediverse to grow into a safe place for anyone to express themselves. And it's hard to see that happening when the developers (and moderators of the original instance, lemmy.ml) are unapologetic authoritarians. When they say they want people to be respectful, there seems to be a double meaning. After all, banning people for talking about human rights violations doesn't seem to be conducive to an open, honest platform where people can express themselves. The developers of lemmy are, sadly, committed to the ideas of old-school authoritarian governments. And I worry that's going to be a damaging force in what could have otherwise been a wonderful platform. Just my two cents.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I am like a veteran to this site because i joined 3 years before new people moved to here

I agree with this post and I think that its important to have a post like this to remind people.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

It's nice to have a place where I can ask genuine questions without being called a complete idiot just for asking.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

I don't agree with this but I respect your opinion

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

this! I hope we stay such a friendly and open-minded community where one doesn't have to fear to say/write their thoughts.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Good luck with that. Knowing were the exodus has come from. We can start vetting the new users but this is not proven effective.

Malicious reporting can also become a problem if we start being trigger happy on banning users.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

That is of course quiet a difficult task. And will be very much in the hands of the moderators. Just like the countless mods that voluntarily keept reddit running. I'am quiet positive that we cant accomplish that even better here.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

"YOU" are not your argument. Disagreement is not an attack on you as an individual and should not be taken as such.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Why do you hate me and attack me so ruthlessly 😭

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

Good advice for life outside in the real world as well whenever possible. You can disagree without going thrermonuclear.

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

Tone policing is classist and is the reason I stopped using this instance. It'll be popular with the liberals who will weaponise it against those saying things they dislike but it'll cause situation after situation where leftists get punished ultimately driving away the base of people that supported the site and platforming up to this point.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Tone policing is classist

Apologies if this is something that you think should be obvious to anyone, but I'm genuinely curious what you mean by "classist" here.

I occasionally encounter assholes from all walks of life and prefer to avoid them all the same. I'm actively in favor of reasonable moderation on social media sites to filter assholes out because it's better for my mental health.

Nobody's saying we can't have differences of opinion and disagreements. But I don't think it's unreasonable that we should be expected to engage respectfully or not at all. This is a standard that should be applied equally to all. It's difficult to do, but we should also strive to hold people we otherwise generally agree with on principle accountable if they're being aggressive/hostile/antagonistic because, at best, they're being a bad advocate of our own positions and, at worst, they're being an asshole.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Alright I'll bite.

As you move down the wealth ladder you eventually reach a point at which there is a culture change. There are significant differences in the culture of the average middle-income anglo with guilt about their privilege compared to the people who are really, genuinely struggling. Once you cross a certain threshold, I'll call it the poverty threshold for the sake of this reply but it's not really a strict line but more of a broadly intersecting spectrum where there are many people who can blend into both groups, you reach a behavioural change point. This behavioural change, both in speech and in attitudes, is generally driven by those of us below a certain income level genuinely not giving a single fuck about how someone speaks but rather what they are saying.

Take for example my home of Liverpool. If I go down the council flats I'll find myself hundreds of people who will speak in ways that the middle-income liberals of america would find abhorrent. They will cuss you for a minor thing that makes it seem like you just killed their dog. This is normalised culture for them, and among their peers it is perfectly fine behaviour - but to the sheltered middle income person who sees it as an overreaction? It's shocking, and they don't like it.

This trend occurs towards the lower income groups because frankly their is less and less incentive to ruin relationships with people over social policing. Far more is put up with and accepted because everyone's got it rough and nobody's interested in making someone's life harder by getting overly emotional about a few swearsies.

I fit into one of the blending people, seamlessly transitioning between the two and speaking both ways. I grew up in squats, but I also got a very fortunate break that led to me getting an education in what many would regard as the ruling class side of our education system, which is split between schools for the workers vs schools for the bourgeoisie.

Anyway. The point is that the tone policing has the effect of shutting out these people from participation. The reason you don't see the majority of these people in participation online isn't because they don't have access, it's because they've had the experience of getting banned everywhere for not speaking like a cultured middle income liberal, and they've frankly got bigger priorities in their lives than learning how to speak like the people they fucking despise.

It is classism because it explicitly shuts out this class of people from participation. Almost everywhere online the tone policing functions as a tool of class discrimination that bends internet culture towards privileged middle-income groups over the poor. It's not explicitly intended to do this, but it is the outcome of it. Much like for example having a "no hoodies" rule in a shop doesn't function to keep out middle-income people but keeps out the "chavs", if you'll forgive my use of a classist slur for effect.

You wanna get aggressive and go at it? Go ahead. Do it. How something is expressed is not important compared to what is actually being said. The issue with this form of classism is that a section of society goes completely unrepresented online because of it, people whose politics almost always align with my own socialist views once they're well educated in what their interests are.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Thank you for responding thoughtfully and giving me things to consider I hadn't thought about much previously.

This seems like a tricky problem to me because, while I understand that there are inherent issues with deplatforming people who are simply edgier and more coarse in their dialog, whether it's due to their culture, socioeconomic status, or otherwise, I also feel like I have a right not to tolerate undue abuse in my online discourse. You mention your own ability to context switch with your use of language and I understand and appreciate that's a luxury and ability many people don't have in life. I guess I don't really see a great solution to the problem you've described other than flattening wealth inequality and getting people to mingle more amongst cultures starting at a young age.

As far as dealing with adults goes right now, though, I'm willing to have conversations with anyone who will genuinely consider my viewpoint and express why they agree or disagree rather than simply attack my character and offer nothing of substance. I'll engage even if they come back in a more hostile tone than I'd normally appreciate. You have not attacked my character and you've replied thoughtfully, so this exchange has been productive (at least for me) 🙂

Circling back to some of my previous thoughts, I think regardless of culture/class one general problem I see is that when we talk amongst our various in-groups, we don't have a direct contrarian viewpoint to challenge. This lets us get lazy in our internal discussions, accept as fact the ideas others would challenge, leave unexplained the concepts that our in-group just tends to know already, and worst of all vilify dissenting viewpoints to a dehumanizing extent. I see it in all groups, but specifically I see it first hand in liberal groups I'm in and I realize that it can be seductive to talk about conservativism (for example) as simply evil. Hell, I often see fellow liberals tearing apart their own if someone doesn't live up to a 100% purity standard they've created.

When I start hearing my liberal in-groups parrot such talking points, I take a step back and remind myself this is emotional, not rational, discourse and is not a productive way to discuss sociopolitical issues with others. Unfortunately, I don't think enough people do this, so we ultimately get shouting matches when different ideologies bump into each other. Thus, my impassioned plea is that we all try to moderate ourselves and our own in-groups to the extent we are able. We can downvote people we might otherwise agree with if they're being assholes, for example. It will make intersectional dialog more enjoyable for everyone.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

but specifically I see it first hand in liberal groups I’m in and I realize that it can be seductive to talk about conservativism (for example) as simply evil. Hell, I often see fellow liberals tearing apart their own if someone doesn’t live up to a 100% purity standard they’ve created.

Liberal groups are squeezed because the middle is disappearing under the steadily tightening contradictions. You only have to walk the streets for a day or two to see the results of liberalism, certainly it has created great productivity but the production is not going to the majority of people. When the soviet union fell the liberal ruling class (which I include conservatives in, they are two halves of liberalism, the political ideology of capitalism) went into overdrive taking away every single benefit given to the people in pursuit of competition with a real threat that sought to improve people's standard of living worldwide.

As such, liberals are radicalising in much the same way that many pushed to the left (communists/anarchists under the umbrella of socialism) are and as much as many pushed to the fascist right are. It was the liberals in the SDP that killed Rosa Luxembourg to prevent the would-have-been sparticist German revolution which then probably led to the nazis taking power, liberals aren't incapable of being "extremist" in their own sense. As they get threatened more and more between the rising far left and the rising far right they themselves become just as radical about maintaining the status quo, this in turn causes them to shut us socialists out of their spaces. And why do they do that? Because they really don't want people like you talking to people like me, because when people like you talk to people like me you come away from the interaction just a little bit more red than you were yesterday. They see that happening everywhere, and the only method they have to deal with it is to prevent the mixing of groups.

When I start hearing my liberal in-groups parrot such talking points, I take a step back and remind myself this is emotional, not rational, discourse and is not a productive way to discuss sociopolitical issues with others.

This is precisely when someone sometimes needs a verbal slap. One of the only tools we have for moving people in the online space is creating discomfort, and if creating discomfort in someone over the way one interaction occurs brings them towards behaving differently in a future interaction then it is a valid and useful tool to have available. Some people need a dressing down before they open up. Some people do not.

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

I disagree. Reading content online is inherently different from listening to someone speaking out loud. Internet discourse must be different in order for us to better understand each other. Tone and emotion do not come off well in text posts so we adjust our way of communicating accordingly.

I don't know why I bother though, you clearly have a problem with a large portion of society that has done nothing to harm you. The average person is not out to get you. Your anger at the middle class is exactly what the super rich want.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Disagree. I don't give a shit.

that has done nothing to harm you

Yeah sure thing, except exploit the fuck out of people, enslave everyone, commit mass genocide and destroy the planet. Done absolutely NOTHING to harm me my ass.

Your anger at the middle class is exactly what the super rich want.

The middle class are aspiring bourgeoisie, there's a reason they're officially called the petit-bourgeoisie. This is not a conversation about the middle-class, it is a conversation about middle-income people, which are two entirely different things.

There is zero value in having a conversation with anyone that names themselves chromosome though, definitely a totally normal name to choose.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

More power to ya. I like the ruleset here, but that's the glorious thing about Lemmy: don't like the rules of your instance? Go to one that works better for you.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Yeah that's why I spend almost all my time on Hexbear instead.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I've encountered some people who are not so... respectful with disagreements. I've made use of the report feature, however, it doesn't seem to be of much use.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

you haven't been entirely respectful in your disagreements either come on now

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sounds pretty fascist to me /s

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

May I add:

  • "disagreeing is not hating"

Even ChatGPT can get this.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

ChatGPT has more social skills than a lot of people do...

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Except when it's about THAT topic, of course...

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You mean racism, sexism, and homo/transphobia? Yeah. I hear ya on that!

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Only one of those is called in otherwise entirely sane situations

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago
load more comments
view more: next ›