Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)A
Posts
12
Comments
361
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • As a casual suggestion, it's fine by me. I like the broad idea of encouraging people to upvote and encourage stuff they want to see more of, rather than focus on down voting stuff they don't agree with. But I suspect most people already upvote much more than they downvote so the ratio of 2:1 wouldn't affect many people's behaviour (although be interesting to see some stats on that!). And my prejudice is the small number of chronic downvoters would work around any rule, just like the freekarma subs on reddit.

    So putting aside the technical difficulties, it seems like a change that wouldn't substantial modify general behaviour, and wouldn't prevent bad actors (although it might make their lives a little more hassleful, which isn't a bad thing). I think that's why people have been suggesting psychological solutions, because developing a lemmy culture where people don't care about points is probably less effort and more effective than adding ratios that don't change much. But it's not an awful idea, and if it was introduced it wouldn't bother me. Tbh, I'd be fine with removing all up /down votes and we could go back to forum style of actually writing what you liked or didn't about a post.

  • Yeah, as far as I understand it the way that fediverse communities work is that whoever makes and moderate them get to decide what they're for, what rules, etc. and then there's a level of emergent culture that arises depending on what users actually engage in the community, even if it doesn't live up to the name.

    I can totally sympathise with frustration about what different communities end up being like, and being told "why don't you make your own c/globalnews?" isn't a simple solution. But as others have said, perhaps it's not as bad as it feels to you right now. If you've been the victim of online bullying (which is what someone going through your post history and blanket down voting everything is) of course that's going to feel awful, but the actual down votes are a very small part of the issue. Lemmy doesn't have that many posts, so I come across loads of low (and even negative) rated posts. If there's groupthink that leads to some of your posts being down voted to oblivion, it's not nice to see, but plenty of folks are still seeing your posts. And when I see something in negative votes I will often check it out just to see what's up, and sometimes it's something dumb and awful, and sometimes it's just a unpopular opinion. So while banning down votes might feel nicer, because it would mask all the people disliking your posts, it probably wouldn't find lots of people who suddenly agree with you.

  • I think if someone is sad and obsessive enough to go through a user's post history to give a hundred down downvotes... Then they'd probably also be fine with scrolling through All and up voting two hundred posts first.

    I would imagine my ratio is at least 20 upvotes per downvote, but I still wouldn't want it throttled. A lot of my down votes are when I think something doesn't belong in a community, and I feel like I'm contributing positively to lemmy by downvoting inappropriate or dreadful things. If they were rationed I'd be tempted to just avoid contributing to 'save them".

    If there was going to be a weird rule about downvotes, I'd be more tempted to limit them to members of the communities. That way people on All don't downvote some niche post that isn't to their tastes but is perfect for the little community it was posted to.

  • The isolated, rural place I grew up did something like that. There was a young guy who had grown up here, but was born in Asia. I can't remember the exact details, but basically he got a criminal record for something (although it was commonly believed that he'd actually taken the blame for something he hadn't done to protect his girlfriends brother who was on probation or something) and because of some recent anti-immigration policies from central government, he was going to be deported back to Thailand (or wherever) even though he didn't speak the language and hadn't been there since he was a baby.

    The local community were outraged and campaigned against it, saying he was a valued and responsible member of their community, then when immigration officers were sent they protested and prevented them from taking him. No idea how they came up with a legal justification in the end, but he was allowed to stay. And it certainly made me respect the place more.

  • Who was that? Or any more details? I'm intrigued!

    Edit: do you just mean marx? That's less intriguing, not wrong, but less intriguing.

  • Thanks for the info! But honestly, I'm not looking to watch anyone. I just remember it being a thing people talked about in the past, and wondering if people still did it or if social media had replaced it. As a piece of culture, I find it intriguing - but I'm the sort to watch YouTube at double speed because of impatience, no way I'm sitting through any sort of stream, let alone a pointless one.

  • Uh huh, forgot. :p

  • Good to know webcams are still a thing! Although mostly that site seems to be outdoor cameras and a 'adult' section, not someone turning their life into the Truman Show.

    And just for clarity, this isn't something I'm searching for (I'm way on the other end of the attention spectrum from people who want to watch someone do nothing). I'm more just curious about if it's a thing, and why people would want to stream or watch something like that

  • Do they just stream their day to day life though? I've never really used twitch, but I thought it was mostly folks doing specific sessions of playing a game or drawing a picture or something, not just streaming 24/7 as they live life.

  • Ah! That would make more sense!

    Edit: did a bit of research, and there were defintely some intentional live streamers, but maybe aiside from those couple of people, the rest were just a reminder of the importance of ip security.

  • I love Boost, no idea if it's ios

  • If drinking less isn't actually your priority at the moment, it shouldnt be the focus of your therapy sessions. And if your therapist doesn't follow your lead, then you should get a different one.

    If you find opening up and admitting shit in therapy hard, then make that your new focus in sessions. As someone who's seen my fair share of therapists, most of them are very thankful if you start with "I almost didn't come to therapy, because I kinda don't belive it works" (but maybe it's also that I feel hopeless about changing my life in general) or "I often lie in therapy because I want you to like me" (does that pattern appear in other parts of your life?)

    Start with first obstacle, not the biggest or even the most harmful. Then you can work on those things first, rather than waste time, money and frustration pretending to be doing something else.

  • I think he's suggesting that if someone doesn't know their world ranking, then they might be quite good, but not seriously good. And if they are world ranked, they wouldn't claim "they could beat anyone" unless they were the world champion. In which case they would know.

    Bur he can't really know anything about your skills from a comment, so who cares. Either way, you'd both certainly smash my sorry ass.

  • Got dialup as a young teen in the 90s - first with CompuServe, then usenet and the early Web. Usenet was amazing, fun communities, kibology, and great for dialup, and as someone who lives in the country, I still wish sites had more options for downloading stuff in advance to view when out of signal.

    A less positive part of usenet was back then it was completely uncensored (or at least, that child me had unrestricted access) . At the time I thought it was normal and good to be able to get porn with people my age, instead of weird adults. But now I feel pretty sad and icky that this was my introduction to sex, and horrible if I think abiut the situations behind those pictures.

  • There's a fair amount of evidence linking wage stagnation over the last 50 years to erosion of collective bargaining and union membership. Unless there are very strong incentives companies are not going to pay employees more than they need to. Employees as a group have a lot of bargaining power, but as individuals, very little. Unless you happen to worn in a highly skilled, and high demand occupation, which are exactly the jobs that have seen wages remain comparatively high.

  • I don't understand how you link tones to the do re mi scale? Tones in Mandarin are about relative intonational patterns (rising, falling, etc), I find it hard to understand how you set the tonic note (the do) for a conversation, unless you are literally singing the entire conversation.

  • In cities I'd agree, but when I lived in a closeknit rural area it was probably majority women. As the rest of the commentors are saying, I think it's mostly a perceived safety issue for a lot of women. But if you're likely to know the name, address and family history of everyone who gets into your taxi, it's less of a concern.

  • Jolt Cola, "All the sugar, twice the caffeine!"

  • As the other commentator says, medieval Europe was mostly early twenties. Studies of stone age remains suggest a first birth age average of 19.5 and contemporary hunter gather societies have a comparable average. Sexual activity generally begins earlier, during adolescence, but the most "reproductively successful" age for beginning childbearing has been shown to be around 18-19. Also, this age at first birth isnt "Average age of a child's mother" as many women would have multiple kids over their life, so the average sibling would have a much older mother at birth than the firstborn.

    Its important to remember that puberty has shifted massively since industrialisation, "menarche age has receded from 16.5 years in 1880 to the current 12.5 years in western societies". So the post-puberty fecundity peak, that use to happen 17-19, when women are fully grown enough to minimise birth complications, now happens at a disressingly young 13-15. Not only is this a big social yuck for most western societies, but it's reproductively unideal, because of the complications linked to childbirth at that age.