• stormesp@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    55
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    11 months ago

    God lord, can we get a bit of filtering on the bullshit of articles that get posted on this community? I apreciate anyone that spends their time filling this sub with content, but the quality of the content shared is just terrible

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      11 months ago

      This user posts a ton and seems to take the shotgun approach. I guess that’s what we get if people aren’t willing to post better content.

    • ninjan@lemmy.mildgrim.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      11 months ago

      Then downvote and move on. No need to make people that actually post content feel unwelcome and unappreciated. That just leads to no content and thus no reason to even use Lemmy / the Fediverse.

      • wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Considering the massive push across multiple lemmy instances to completely remove downvotes, leaving a comment is actually becoming the only way to state you dont like or want specific content on a sub.

        The fediverse actively disagrees with you on how to filter content quality.

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          11 months ago

          And IMO a comment is far better than a vote. A vote says “I clicked a button,” whereas a comment says, “I cared enough to express myself.” I only downvote w/o commenting if another comment communicates what I wanted to, in which case I upvote that one.

          • wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            Oh, heavily heavily heavily disagree. The fediverse is going to fall apart if it commits to getting rid of votes, because the website it is copying all of its formatting from was explicitly designed to self filter community content with votes.

            Not being able to filter content without detailing expressly why will fill the site with garbage, because few people have the free time to waste commenting on every post, but quickly saying “yes this belongs here / no it does not” is much easier and doable while browsing.

            Votes also help communities self moderate, a problem front and center on lemmy with the current situation of abysmal mod tools and worse average mod quality than reddit had. (No offense to passing mods.)

            But the fediverse seems dedicated to learning this lesson the hard way, so we either need to hold on and hope the ship doesnt sink or start swimming to a better boat.

            • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              I never said we should eliminate votes, just that comments are more useful than votes alone. If you down vote, leave or upvote a comment that explains why.

              The problem with votes on their own is brigading, as in people down vote stuff because it’s unpopular (at least to a very mobilized and motivated group). The vote itself doesn’t explain what’s wrong with the content, only that a lot of people clicked the button.

              So I’m in favor of requiring the user to either leave or upvote a comment for the down vote function to count.

              • wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                I dont really agree that you need to explain what was wrong with the content. And brigading happens with comments too, arguably to a worse end.

                Explaining every vote you make, or requiring a yes vote before you allow a no vote, also defeats the purpose of voting at all. I get it can feel bad to have a comment downvoted but… Like… Its really not a big deal. Especially in a system that has even less weight on karma. Sometimes the group didnt agree with you, and thats a normal part of community interactions. You shrug and move on.

                • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  feel bad

                  That’s not the point at all though. The point is that it hides good content that a motivated group wants to silence. We had precisely this problem earlier in Lemmy’s history where posts critical of China were heavily down voted, not because of quality, but because the group didn’t like the message.

                  Requiring a comment gives context to the negative reaction. It’s not a silver bullet, but it should increase the barrier to hiding content, hopefully enough that good, controversial content stays visible.

                  I’m actually working on a Lemmy alternative that uses a web of trust instead of votes to prioritize and moderate content. Reddit has shown the limitations of voting, and I’m more interested in interesting content than content the majority likes.

                  • wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    11 months ago

                    Comments do the same thing, by drowning the one opinion in a sea of alternate opinions, and is directly incentivizing only interaction via people with the time to type up a comment. You arent preventing brigades, you are reducing the number of users who arent capable of attempting to brigade at all.

                    Especially since your version of brigading is literally how communities work. If the group doesnt agree with an opinion, even opinions you do agree with, the opinion is going to be drowned out. You cannot police “opinion quality.” Because such a subjective thing is good when it agrees with you and bad when it doesnt.

                    Good luck and I look forward to seeing it, but to be frank it sounds like you want to build a personal group chat, not a social media site. And like any web of trust, it relies on the integrity of the central member. Which isnt a defense against brigading, just a defense against brigading that doesnt come from the central member or their points of trust.

                    E: mind, not that theres anything wrong with crafting your own supported super chat. Just that its less social media, and more a hyper evolved chat among friends and friend-of-friends

      • stormesp@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        If you bothered to read my comment, i said that before anything else, i apreciate the effort of generating content. But at the end of the day its not of much use for anyone flooding a community with shitty content.

    • William@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      IMO, the problem is that there’s not a log of good content being produced. The vast majority of it is vapid clickbait garbage. Some people eat that up, and they also share it. I don’t think there’s a way to stem the tide. Ever.