• Artair Geal@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Absolutely no surprise there. When you keep the barrier to entry low and throw in an algorithm to increase “engagement” via outrage, the soup turns to poison quickly.

    This is why every time someone says the Fediverse is “too confusing,” I just smile and nod. That attitude of petulant, lazy, self-imposed gatekeeping is what’s keeping the Fediverse a much nicer place to be.

    • HamnavoePer@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s concerning just how many people can’t be bothered to spend 5 minutes to pick an instance… Keeps it nicer for us though

      • Cethin@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’ve been explaining it like email. There’s no email webpage you go to to create an account. It’s just a protocall a bunch of people have agreed to use, so you go to one of them and you create an address. I also think your username in the fediverse should be called an address too, but I don’t think that’ll catch on. It makes it a lot easier to explain, because everyone can use email, even the most tech illiterate people.

    • GreenCrush@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      This this this. The fediverse being “confusing” keeps the idiots, boomers, trolls, and overall horrible people away. Having to learn something new is too much for those people. Lemmy/Mastodon and so on are “nerd” platforms, and I really like it that way.

    • animist@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Absolutely agree. I love the high barrier to entry and how it has kept the conversations (for the most part) more substantial.

  • pavnilschanda@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Honestly apps like Threads and Twitter should just be a containment site for these types of people. Let them be…

    • flashmedallion@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      If threads scoops up all the people who turned twitter and reddit into celebrity gossip meme ghettos and keeps them in the shallow end of the pool then everybody wins

      • Parculis Marcilus@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I won’t call em ghettos, those are concentration camps in which everyone slowly gasing themselves with toxic culture just like what shown in 4chan

    • Ben Shapiro@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I am only on a platform “for something” if that “something” is AOC. Purely for professional reason.

    • Fisk400@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      They are basically corporate accounts that are payed to be bigots online. You are looking at literal astroturf and asking why it doesn’t feel like grass.

    • Aceticon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      After over 3 decades of voting, across 3 countries, even having held beliefs all the way from what I though was “communism” (when I was little more than a kid) through neoliberalism and finally settling down to a sort of social democracy (shaped by and subservient to my principles) and having even been involved in a supposedly thinking leftwing party around here I would stay that mindless tribalism is exactly what almost the entirety of politics is nowadays.

      The whole “building your on political beliefs starting from your core principles upwards, and always keeping them in mind” thing is very unusually: normally (even in that supposedly “thinking” people party) it’s all about choosing sides, growing an emotional bond with your side and then just blindly waving the team’s flag and unskeptically take in and parrot whatever your side’s celebrities says as if they’re unchallangeable truths delivered down all the way from the gods.

      In fact I’m pretty pissed from discovering that most people in even that party of supposedly thinking people are little more than clubist political parrots. It does however explain why so many measures people parrot as the right thing to do are actually one-sided and in practice not anchored in the principles we’re told they’re suppose to promote, sometime even de facto going against them: when people are unskeptical unthinking fans of the team, they’re really easy to lead by the nose by womever captures the leadership positions on that team, an sometimes said leaders aren’t even purposefully manipulative, they’re just nowere as bright as their small-pond celebrity status makes them think and generally have ridiculously narrow life experience and hence don’t really know much about how the World works outside their tiny tiny bubble.

    • intensely_human@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      In a place with first past the post voting, two parties will dominate and then it does become a sports game.

      Two player games are fundamentally different than three or more player games, in terms of which strategies are optimal to win.

    • s_s@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Politics isn’t football, you don’t pick your team and have to let everyone know about it.

      It’s a preservation strategy for failed ideologies.

      • Rabbithole@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah but in this particular case it really needs to happen at the instance level rather then the user level, and preferably all instances at that. It’s about mitigating the damage that Meta/Facebook are going to do (to the entire fediverse as a system) more than it is about not seeing shitty low-effort racism or whatever they’ll have there.

        If I could actually trust Meta to be benign then I’d maybe agree with you about just blocking their shit as a user, but there’s just no chance of believing that about them.

  • finthechat@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Maybe someone can fill me in on this because I don’t know anything about it. “LibsofTiktok” is clearly just a right wing actor making liberal viewpoints look stupid, yeah? No one who actually identifies as “liberal” would ever willingly call themself a “lib.”

    • Johnny@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The woman behind it has become a kind of conservative celebrity. She doxxes random people, especially teachers who talk about their sexuality on TikTok and sends her minions to harass them. In the past, she has caused bomb threats to children’s hospitals for providing gender affirming care. She is about as despicable as a person can be.

  • Margot Robbie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Time and time again, it has been proven that “absolute free speech” online just attracts the absolute worst kind of people.

    I did expected them to fail immediately, but this is way funnier than I expected. They either need to start banning immediately and start throwing money at celebs to use Threads, otherwise no one mainstream will ever advertise there.

    • Thorosofbeer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      You mean the non-heavily moderated platforms allow for discussion on topics you care about by people who disagree with you.