Great writing on the current Reddit saga. The author put down in words a lot of things in my mind I couldn’t find the right words.
You must log in or register to comment.
Could not agree more. I said basically this, less eloquently after a day of being on sh.itjust.works.
What’s even cooler here is I feel we have the opportunity to have neighboring villages: I’m a villager in my instance, you’re a villager in your instance, and civility and understanding is promoted because we are in a real sense representatives of our respective villages. We don’t want to make our villages look bad.
As these instances & communities stabilize and mature over the coming weeks/months, I’m very excited to see what happens next.
Doesn’t it feel completely different to participate in a local community vs a federated community? Its so interesting how that works even if everyone can see everything everywhere.
Eh. You can find a cozy little community on another instance and have it feel like home. Especially if you have a “display name” which will make it hard for anyone to even see you’re from another instance unless they actually check
Especially since “villages” can completely block an entire other “village”.
Keeps communities that don’t want to be isolated more reasonable without having hardline rules
What’s even cooler here is I feel we have the opportunity to have neighboring villages: I’m a villager in my instance, you’re a villager in your instance, and civility and understanding is promoted because we are in a real sense representatives of our respective villages. We don’t want to make our villages look bad.
Such a nice point! You gave me something to think about now :) In a way, while you are still anonymous, the instance gives you an outside identity. You don’t have to remember the username to “know someone from the village” in a way the author describes it, the instance kinda already gives you this.
Well met, fellow villager named… uh… Barbarian
Yeah, I keep saying this to people when they worry about fragmentation. Like it’s important to have all the Baseball fans in the same Baseball forum under one big banner.
No, that’s not better, that’s worse. What you want is a thousand interconnected forums with 100 people each, not a forum with 100,000 people.
I agree. The problem is that many people who come to Lemmy don’t know how it works, and they gravitate to the biggest instances automatically. Heck, it’s what I did when I joined Beehaw. It wasn’t until a few days later that I understood the pro’s of this method. Fortunately, the Beehaw community rules really aligned with me, so I was lucky in that way.
How is community engagement better in a interconnected forum compared to a single forum consisting of all the participants? I’m asking out of ignorance
How would cross community discussions take place?
@honeyed_coffee For the reasons the OP mentioned. Familiar faces, being recognized in a community instead of being just today’s main character.
In a single large forum most participants are silent, as they must be or it’d be a cacophony. Many are silent out of worry that they need to say something good enough to impress a hundred thousand people, not just something interesting to their local 100 friends.
On Fediverse things escape their local instances and their local forum-groups by boosts mostly.
As karma mattered more you lost a whole subset of regular posters that felt kamra took a relaxing pastime and made it into a job. Karma was used as a kind of stopgap for the issue of managing the cacophony in a busy thread, which made the points matter even more and caused even more people to disengage.
Personally, I found that karma led to self-censorship of any idea that remotely deviated from the group consensus.
Can you think of alternatives to voting, though? Sorting always requires some curating system that isn’t random but I can’t think of any that would be robust to group consensus
I don’t think user voting in of itself is a problem. It’s the consequences of large negative voting that causes the real problems. In Reddit, a single unpopular comment on a popular subreddit could send a casual Redditor into negative karma which effectively shadowbans them from Reddit. As a result, you see people deleting their comments to stop the bleeding. Controversial opinions are punished severely.
Ofc! whats the point of posting anything when you have people actively work to suppress your thoughts and statements?
Really user-based meta-moderation had been pretty much a disaster, not sure we need internet points at all, things worked great without them.
I hadn’t considered the idea of small communities at all. It would be quite interesting to see how far this develops. Thanks for taking the time to respond
to start with, ive had more vibrant, long and interesting conversations more often on a site of 300-3,000 as opposed to a sub with millions.
deleted by creator
There’s the problem of filtering as well – if I jump into a thread that’s a few hours old on Reddit, there may already be hundreds of replies. How do I filter this? How many discussions have you been in where there were several different people all with the same response, simply because someone else had the same opinion 30 minutes earlier?
On the flip side, if you’re in a small local sub, how do you get new ideas injected? It’s the “joke #243” problem, where everyone’s heard everything already. Until more people arrive with fresh insights and ideas, the community can become insular.
i think its just another UX issues, reddit also had the concept of topics but it was rather weak and not leveraged. With a federation setup topical sorts should get more prevalence. Even getting some small communities togher might be a challenge, even some small comms dont post because reddit culture rather than the sub being small. “back in the day” you could easily find active communities of 10 users on a phpbb forum. Part of the trick? IMO, no internet points.
I agree but I think the days of phpbb forums are unfortunately over. I don’t think people will switch back to them.
id disagree, this dynamic exists on discord with thousands of communities and hundred’s of redundant servers. What you are seeing as “people” is mostly “folks Stockholmed by reddit”
I can imagine small communities spread across. By virtue of its size, there are high chances of topics staying relevant too.
I am concerned about small bubbles though. Discussions in single instances that never bounce across to similar communities in other instances but I suppose that’s putting the cart before the horse
realistically the same thing happens on reddit, any sub not big enough is very unlikely to ever be featured on the home page, and this is not always a bad thing, some communities are not interested in being featured, some are brigaded as a prize.
I can see pros and cons. More people all at once gives greater odds of some unique perspective to take hold that would otherwise only be seen in a single smaller sub community. But there’s also a more vested interest in the health of “your” community if it’s smaller.
Baseball is a fun example because I’m really sad the biggest group so far has only like 80 subscribers. I NEEEEEED my fix of baseball chatter so I really want that one to grow, lol.
IDK, it seems that once a community gets big enough, it devolves into an echo chamber so the unique perspectives get drowned out. Sometimes the unique perspectives wins and slowly propagates through the community, and sometimes the unique perspective gets buried, but uniqueness is rarely highlighted.
For example, I used to be active in /r/personalfinance (kind of a cesspool imo), and there have been times when my perspective won out and I saw it get parroted (often incorrectly), and I was later corrected by yet another perspective and that one got buried and to this day people are parotting my incomplete perspective instead of the more correct perspective. I tried correcting it, but ended up giving up.
So a community needs to be big enough to have diversity, but not so big that the hive mind takes over. I think that magic number is somewhere around 10-100k people.
I must say, I was always a stranger on Reddit and everyone was a stranger to me. I was there for the interesting links and discussions, but never for the people or the community.
Being a jerk wasn’t the norm, so it wasn’t as bad as portrayed in the article, but it certainly wasn’t a village at any point. Sure, I visited many small subs all the time, so those places could have been villages, but I was always a traveler, constantly on the move. If I noticed a particular username, I was nearly guaranteed never to see that name again, so I never really paid much attention to the thousands of names I would inevitably forget.
I hear a lot of people talk about how Reddit was full of terrible people. I very rarely saw these people though. Not sure if their voices got down-voted, or maybe I simply stayed away from the communities they gravitated to. Personally I never really browsed Reddit home screen, I just bookmarked the communities I liked and went directly to their pages. So maybe that’s how I missed out on a lot of it.
That said, I did se quite a bit of nonsense when browsing gaming forums. PC gamers hating console gamers, xbox gamers mocking ps gamers and vice-versa. Never did understand peoples need to be superior in the gaming world. These are all just methods of enjoying the same hobby!
As long as you stayed in small, well moderated subreddits you did find what the OP describes as a community, i for one tended to shy away from the big ones and specially the default biggest
The problem is that smaller subs could be Eternal Septembered almost overnight by getting onto /r/all and being swamped by people with no interest in following the established norms. The UK politics sub after Brexit for example was never the same again.
UK politics after brexit hasn’t been the same. The penalties for lying in that vote campaign were too weak and the offenders are only now starting to suffer the consequences of continuing in that manner.
I’ve noticed that it really matters which subs you read. I tried to make my reddit experience a bit more serious, so that I wouldn’t be just joyscrolling cat gifs all day and doomscrolling hate news all night. That’s why I focussed a lot on Linux, FOSS, science, technology, engineering, maths, statistics, biology, physics, chemistry subs and stayed away from subs that were more focused on entertainment and jokes etc. That’s probably a big reason why I didn’t see that many jerks.
I had the same experience. That said, I also was apparently in mid sized subs, or the ones that were sort of Q&A (sysadmin, askphotography) so I never saw a sense of community. I might recognize 5 usernames as having good or bad answers / comments, but being topic focused (even tv or movies was like this) I never really formed any kind of connection.
The closest I could see like that is actually on things like the subs discord where you’re kind of shooting the shit a lot more, and it seems more ephemeral. Like Photography discord has an off topic and a computer and a tv channel as well as a lounge / anything channel. These are the photography people talking about other stuff too so you kind of can get to know them. On reddit these are all different subs, so you’ll never get the photography subs feeling about the latest anime…
Idk, I also may just be strange.
Defederation I believe is a really powerful tool. More so than it seems. It creates islands of a sort and you can be more or less assured that your interests are respected. If they’re not you move to an instance that federates with likeminded individuals. Makes it so much easier to isolate bad actors since they tend to group together. And then you disconnect from them and suddenly a whole avalanche of problems simply goes away. Moderation is obviously necessary but it is much more of a community effort. Keep in mind that most admins and mods are here because they want to use the forum just like you do. Your interests align much more than if a vc backed company Hosts your community with the singular goal of extracting as much value out of you as they can in whatever way available.
One underrated thing that keeps the village going is the police. Or, in our case, the mods.
I know, I know! Everyone hates the mods - with their over-inflated egos and unaccountable practices and their capricious banning of innocuous subjects.
But life without the mods means a village where rioters run rampant.
I don’t think we need the police comparison…
Some moderation is necessary, but if things get out of hand your instance will just be defederated. So it is more self regulating than you suggest.
How do you stop your instance getting out of hand?
By moderating it, as I said some is necessary obviously.
I just don’t like the “police” comparison. There are ways to motivate people to keep order without sending armed state goons to kill or imprison you.
I know your comment isn’t really about the metaphorical “village”, but police as we know them today are a far more modern conception than we think. Plenty of societies/villages/whatever did fine without such a force.
I just don’t like the “police” comparison. There are ways to motivate people to keep order without sending armed state goons to kill or imprison you.
I think weather or not this comparison is good or bad will completely depend on where you’re from. The concept of police is good. It’s how it’s practiced that is either good or bad.
disagree on “the concept of police is good”
like I see what you think the police ideally should do, but the police never were about that, and you don’t need police (as in, the institution) to have that
Absolutely, but if the values are spread across the whole community, the village can self-govern itself and enforce the rules without force. If the majority of the villagers don’t tolerate something makes the job of a police much easier.
I think that’s a lovely idea - which doesn’t work in reality. At some point someone will need to be cast out. That can’t be done by peer pressure, because scammers, spammers, and griefers don’t care about that.
Individual blocks also don’t work because they leave unaware users open to being abused.
Sure, you could have a town council vote on a block, or have software which blocks a user for all if they have been blocked >=N times, but that’s still moderation.
This is why I think downvoting submissions/comments is needed. I like how Hacker News forum does it. You need to have a certain number of upvotes on your contributions to even be able to downvote, and if the comment or a reply receives a lot of downvotes it gets greyed out or collapsed.
But again, ability to downvote is not enough, users needs to be aligned on what they want their community to look like. In case of HN, a very devoted and unique community, theres no patience for low effort, agresive and funny without a cause submissions. Their Guidelines itself is a really wonderful read.
As a counter-argument, I never liked this. Because everyone who disagrees gets silenced and even made invisible.
During covid, it was pretty much impossible to disagree that we all must be vaccinated and isolated, or suggesting that natural immunity is much better than vaccinating for younger people. Only afterwards has it become accepted as the truth. During covid, you would be called a conspiracy theorist for talking about natural immunity instead of vaccines.
Even if you don’t agree with this specific point, I wanted to bring it up and show how it creates a complete echo chamber and makes sure everyone seems to agree, because people who don’t are silenced.
Dropping that antivax example is pretty sus
Natural immunity to covid has never been accepted as better. You’re still a conspiracy theorist with very dangerous things to say
Just sneak it in with some exaggerated examples no one supported and hope nobody calls you on it…
Well, your COVID example is a pretty good example for how downvoting actually works for regulating communities. Because like, y’know not vaccinating young people is factually wrong and saying opinions about that were suppressed is conspiratorial thinking
I mean that point was never true, and isn’t true now. Vaccines are much better than getting COVID19. I have no problem removing posts that are flat out wrong according to current knowledge. Conspiracy theories are a waste of time outside of communities dedicated to that.
In the context of Hacker News, disagreement is welcomed (in a way even encouraged) as long as it is constructional and argumentative.
Again, depends on what the community accepts and wants. I agree politically sensitive topics are turmoil, but it doesn’t take much for a community to be accepting of different views.
If the goal is to feed intellectual curiosity, another way of seeing things is always welcomed as long as it is written well
I really think both sides of the coin have something to offer. One thing I like about larger communities is just the shear amount of content and discussion you can see, especially if you have a lot of time to kill. That being said I am VERY much enjoying interacting in a smaller community - haven’t done that in like a decade.
I think more content is a double edged sword though. I find I used Reddit to second guess myself a ton, like which thing to buy, whether I should like something, etc.
In a smaller community, I’m left to think more for myself since I can’t just offload that to the group.
Sometimes that data is really useful, but I think I’ve gotten too dependent. So a SM diet was absolutely in order. And as you said, I’m very much enjoying it. We’ll see what happens in the next few weeks as the Reddit situation resolves one way or another.
Good points!
I’m interested in how many active villages we will get in Lemmy ecosystem.
For those curious about the term
Wow, that was a great read!
Not this part tho
From mobile app stores to Steam, from Facebook to Twitter, this is the enshittification lifecycle
Steam started off shit and got better. Unshittification?
This link and the type of discussion it’s already generated gives me so much hope for the future of Beehaw. This place is something special and I hope it is able to continue being a village. Thanks for the share.
What’s beehaw? I’m on fedia. 😉
