It hits for me when I’m typing it out and I can already read the braindead response they’re going to type and I don’t want to spend another 2 paragraphs preempting the obvious response and I definitely don’t want to wait a few hours/days to explain why they’re still wrong.
Me when I realize the person I’m commenting to is from hexbear.
Tank you!
I still don’t know what the controversy is about with hexbear.
They unironically think, genocide, murder, torture and tanks are the correct way to spread the freedom and joy of communism, and for the same reasons, they are not afraid of telling you so. Being federated with them usually leads to an endless stream of pity flame wars. Because they think arguing and insulting other’s intelligence will make their ideology win.
Ahh. Seems on par for the whole “lemmy’s turning into reddit” thing.
and thus federated platforms show a strength: defederate with the trash, and the rest get better quality posters! … in theory.
That’s because Reddit sells anger quite well. Their bots and human instigators work overtime to get you to comment like that. I think all of us Reddit refugees have fallen for this shit.
We’re not doing great on deprogramming ourselves either. The news outlets not only manufacture consent, they also manufacture outrage. This isn’t a new problem either. It’s been going on since at least the Spanish-American war, probably earlier (see also William Randolph Hurst , Joseph Pulitzer).
We’re not doing great on deprogramming ourselves either.
You can’t just post that without a source 😡
/s
https://hermetic.com/crowley/the-scientific-solution-of-the-problem-of-government/index
- The average voter is a moron. He believes what he reads in newspapers, feeds his imagination and lulls his repressions on the cinemas, and hopes to break away from his slavery by football pools, cross-word prizes, or spotting the winner of the 3.30.
He is ignorant as no illiterate peasant is ignorant; he has no power of independent thought. He is the prey of panic.
But he has the vote.
- The men in power can only govern by stampeding him into wars, playing on his fears and prejudices until he acquiesces in repressive legislation against his obvious interests, playing on his vanity until he is totally blind to his own misery and serfdom.
The alternative method is undisguised dragooning.
In brief, we govern by a mixture of lying and bullying.
-
This desperate resort to archaic weapons is the heritage of hypocrisy. The theories of Divine Right, aristocratic superiority, the moral order of Nature, are all to-day exploded bluffs. Even those of us who believe in supernatural sanctions for our privileges to browbeat and rob the people no longer delude ourselves with the thought that our victims share our superstitions.
-
Even dictators understand this. Mussolini has tried to induce the ghost of Ancient Rome to strut the stage in the image of Julius Cæsar; Hitler has invented a farrago of nonsense about Nordics and Aryans; nobody even pretends to believe either, except through the “Will-to-believe.”
And the presence is visibly breaking down everywhere.
They cannot even be galvanised with spasm of pseudo-activity, as still occasionally happens with the dead toads of superstition…
This was from a pamphlet he distributed on the streets, and I’m not going into the problems that may or not, are or aren’t, in the whole thing, but this post seems relevant, lucid, and veritable.
We’ve all fallen for some media/governmental wtfery, myself included. The issue is correcting it.
From a historical point, I found it immensely interesting. I went to the author’s wiki and was equally fascinated he came to the USA to paint, during the first world war, posisitioned himself as pro Germany, while spying for the UK, all the while.
A lot of people have a lot of miscommunication about him, including me, because I’ve always been under the impression that his spying wasn’t of any importance. And maybe it wasn’t, but that send worth investigating, if I ever have time
Aside, I’m interested to know what sort of anarchy the pamphlet is advocating, or the closest fit.
Or you say fuck it and send the comment, but you refresh the page and he’s downvoted it faster than a human being could have read it lol
This is why “disable inbox replies” is such a great feature that I wish Lemmy would implement. For when you still have something to add, but it looks like the conversation is going downhill, the thought of further responses is causing anxiety, and you know the right choice is going to be to let the other person have the last word anyway.
The block feature is wonderful for this. I’m starting to use it liberally when I just can’t be bothered to deal with someone anymore. I don’t know if there’s a mute user function as well, but that would at least let them yell into the void instead of being blocked outright.
iirc block on Lemmy is “mute” and it doesn’t work like Reddit with preventing any interaction with any posts or comment threads you started (which I’m glad about, Reddit’s block imo is a horrible way of doing it).
Personally I don’t like the block feature for this for two reasons:
- it only targets one user, normally it’s more “I want to stop talking about this for now” than not wanting to talk to one person in particular
- I won’t see anything from that person in the future, which isn’t what I want unless they are really awful, just want to be done with that specific comment thread despite having some degree of respect for the people in it
And I’m the opposite. When I block someone, it’s because I’m sick and tired of that one person in particular and never want anything to do with them ever again. And for my own protection, I don’t want them to be able to see me or interact with my comments ever again, regardless of whether I’ll see that interaction or not.
When I block someone, it’s because I’m sick and tired of that one person in particular and never want anything to do with them ever again
Same, the main thing I’m getting at is, most of the time it’s not like that
Yeah, my personal experience is the opposite where I find myself having to outright block people because I generally don’t have an issue until outright blocking them is needed.
It would be great to have a “mute post/thread/comment” option that just stops any reply notifications for that specific item of yours. That way you don’t have to select specific people to mute/block and it doesn’t affect anything outside of that one specific comment of yours.
Yup, though on the upside notifications seem to only work half the time here.
When I write two paragraphs to reply to someone making a stupid, hateful argument and then they reply “I ain’t reading all that” and get a bunch of upvotes for it, I really think about every super-villain story where the bad-guy was trying to destroy the entire world and I feel a sharp pang of understanding.
Yep.
Flippant, mildly humorous comment, one sentence: (2,345 👍) (123💬)
Well thought out, reliably sourced reply of one to two small paragraphs: (3👍) (0 💬)
Lemmy is actually better on this. I get a lot of upvotes for well thought-out long posts and comments here as well as humorous one-liners. I’ve been pleasantly surprised that people actually take the time to read out my longer posts. On reddit it’d probably just get lost and be another 1 thumber that never got read.
The key is also to make your story interesting. Something that pulls your reader in. Be personal and amicable. Realize you’re talking to real people and speak to those people in your writing. I’m more of a creative writing buff. I managed to eek out 98th percentile for creative writing in my SATs. I love writing. Its my favorite thing to do. I want to be an author. I fucking hate my ADHD. I’ve started a hundred books at least and either bore myself or tell myself its a stupid plot, even though I have friends and family begging for me to finish something.
My early books were written in small notebooks. The old ones that sorta looked like they had cowprint covers with a title on them. They’d get passed around the school for weeks. I’d get them back and people would keep asking me to continue. I never did. Fuck me, I hate ADHD sometimes. But your words are alive. They can heal, hurt, cause laughter and tears, and, above all, words can influence anything. Words are power and, as long as you are careful of that power, you can write any damn length you want.
Honestly, my fear now is AI. I like AI, but I don’t want to write a book and have people claim its AI or AI assisted. I’m regretting not writing one earlier now.
tl;dr: Is k. Writ stuf.
Sorry your comment was too long I got bored halfway through
I barely made it through “Sorry.” TL;DR
This
I have to remind myself engaging is mostly useless.
When I read bs here I’m always switching between this and “if no one calls this out, people might assume it’s true”.
Duty calls. Someone is being wrong on the Internet! 🦸
I usually only do thar when people spread problematic stuff.
To be clear, I ain’t mocking you, I know the feels. Was just referencing
the BibleXKCDSorry, replied in a hurry, hence so short. I cracked a smile at your comment, don’t worry. Also did not know this
psalmxkcd before, thanks.I feel so targeted
Yeah but then the run the risk of arguing with a bot or a troll or a human being uninterested in having a productive discussion.
Yeah, getting out of the discussion at the right point is a skill I did not master yet.
Your engagement is valuable for current or future shareholders of the company owning the platform. It is of paramount importance that you engage as much as possible. Although not enough, we would recommend for example, sleeping 7 hours instead of 8 to make time for engagement such liking/disliking and commenting.
I’ve lived through the times when online discussion was considered “just weird internet stuff, not to be taken seriously” and then people grew up and everyone used the internet and it was the frontier of communication and was “shaping all facets of society” and now we’re back at “just weird internet stuff, not to be taken seriously.”
Here’s a tip for how I’ve improved my social media experience greatly:
Stick to a rule of 1 comment and no further replies.
Strangers online are not going to be convinced by your point of view and there is nothing to gain from getting into a back and forth conversation. Unless it’s a particularly positive or productive conversation about a particular interest you share…there’s nothing to gain from arguing online and lots of potential mental damage you risk.
Proposal for an exception: Where the comments/discussion revolve around something non-controversial with people who are OK with partaking in a conversation without needing to win it.
Alternatively also:
If the topic is controversial and everyone is level-headed and talk calmly.
(Almost impossible on the internet, unless if there’s real good moderation).
I agree, but this scenario is purely hypothetical and so far not proven to exist. The Caps Lock was invented for a reason.
You’re clearly incorrect!
I know you’re playfully joking, but I second their opinion. I was basically on a crusade against misinformation in 2020 and 2021 against COVID deniers and election truthers. Nobody ever changes their mind. Nobody ever admits their wrong. No matter how respectful and accommodating you are, no matter what sources you find, it’s just not worth it. Give one response if you feel inclined, but don’t reply to the reply. Don’t waste your time. Don’t get pointlessly stressed.
People do change their minds sometimes, but it’s never done in the moment and if you press them too hard on their beliefs they’ll double down.
You don’t primarily reply to convince the person you reply to, it’s about the other readers.
On top of that, I don’t think most people realize how that level of dehumanization affects the conversation as a whole. We are not replying to people, we are replying to walls of text, abstract concepts, hypotheses, and we treat one another as such. It’s why anonymous internet discussions so quickly devolve.
It depends on the topic. If you talk about personal or emotional issues the other person is more important.
If you’re are arguing history or technology for example, then topical arguments and facts are more essential. Ideally you attack the arguments, not the person.
The devolvement is usually because there’s little social consequence to being obstinate and uncompromising.
A conversation can be about discovering new information by sharing perspectives and accumulating ideas and facts. If it devolves into a fight about who is right, then it’s about power, dominance, performance, not learning and discovery.
Places like this on the internet are also filled with people who are mentally unwell, have issues with social interactions, etc… That affects the quality of the conversation as well.
Getting into an argument gets you attention, dopamine, excitement and so on. You can be a mighty keyboard warrior fighting for whatever cause you find worthwhile. This makes you feel great while you’re actually a lonely NEET screaming into the void.
I’m speaking from experience here. I attended a group for internet addiction for a while. Half were gamers, the other half lonely NEETs wasting away their days by arguing on the internet.
We know how to change people’s minds, and it’s paradoxically by not confronting the misinformation. Instead, present an alternate but real fact about the root cause of their mis-belief.
I gotta say, there’s a sentiment that nobody has ever said anything on the internet that’s ever changed anyone’s opinion about anything. And it is not a damning indictment of the internet nearly as much as folks who live by the theory.
But maybe they’re right enough that it doesn’t matter. A thousand hours of posting could be spent doing something more productive in swaying public opinion. Maybe “Ender’s Game” is a lie and you cannot actually post your way to the Presidency. I mean, I certainly can’t think of anyone who went so ham on social media that they reshaped an entire nation’s political philosophy.
But also, maybe there’s a negative valiance to posting. Perhaps it’s just harder to post your way into people’s hearts and fill them with love. But its comparatively easy to post your way into their amygdalas and drive them insane.
My stance is: when arguing on lemmy, you’re not only trying to convince the other one. You’re also trying to convince future readers. Even if the other one is an asshole, people see that and that has an effect.
Actually a great tip, thanks! I will take this into my memory.
This seems great but I wonder what the point is then.
If I can’t convince someone right of centre to come to my side and they can’t convince me to come to theirs what’s the point in conversing with people?
Furthermore why do we keep having a circle jerk about how right we are on things and calling out dumb stuff in the world if it’s all futile? Like we know the world is shit and getting worse so why do I relish in it and not just go climbing more.
You’re welcome to do that, but learn to do it properly. If you’re just looking to preach and be outraged, then you’re part of the problem. You can’t change others, but you can change yourself.
I personally love podcasts. I’ll always be able to recommend from there:
You Are Not So Smart: 306 - I Never Thought of it That Way - Mónica Guzmán (rebroadcast). Episode webpage and Media file
If a black man can make friends with the most racist KKK members, and actually get them to change their minds through conversation, then there’s hope for anyone.
You’re not gonna convince me of your rule if you break it.
I think that’s the only recommendation I’ve ever seen for You Are Not So Smart and that episode is particularly good. Daryl Davis is a truly amazing person.
This is what pisses me off by left wing debate bros who basically just make their brand “trigger the conservatives.” They’re no better.
(I am not advocating for some sort of friendly both sides thing as an alternative.)
Ah second comment! Got ya!
My rule is: nothing of value happens beyond the third level of nested replies. Lemmy’s (and reddit’s) format is about not just conversing with others, but the conversation being public and other people having a chance to interject with their own thoughts. But unfortunately, after a certain level, the UIs have to collapse or hide replies and comment, and almost no one clicks to see more or follow a thread, unless it’s a controversial discussion. So, if it is so far away from the OP that every single interface will hide it by default, and it’s not something positive, then it is not worth it to keep the convo and it doesn’t warrant a reply.
I do this but I’ve come to believe it isn’t an admirable quality. I know I should probably strive for a different answer.
deleted by creator
“I didn’t have time to write you a short letter, so I wrote a long one.”
i wanna say Mark Twain said that, but I’m not 100%
I thought it was Victor Hugo but apparently it was Blaise Pascal
It’s a similar story with editing videos. Paring a video back is where most of the time goes.
Jane Austen I thought
Steve Austin?
Maybe it was Tony Hawk?
I think it was Darude Sandstorm.
Maybe it was Austin Mini?
deleted by creator
Reddit? Nah that’s literally every platform.
When you’re 20 minutes into an argument on reddit and suddenly get permanently IP banned for saying something that didn’t even break rules
The net is far more ban happy than it used to, it’s gotten to the point that I don’t feel safe using Steam Forums.
fr man
Didn’t care that much on Reddit, but on Lemmy, I feel like instance admins could choose to ban my account at any time, and that’s fucking annoying.
I lost 7 reddit accounts, some over 12 years old, because I quoted someone saying a gendered slur on a serious discussion sub, so that he couldn’t edit his comment. Then i reported it. They banned me for “using a slur” and I appealed and the mods of that community laughed at me and acted like the sewage that they were and then when I appealed to admins I got perma’d.
New accounts made, those got insta-banned. Used VPN and new email, purged all cookies. Insta shadowban. Repeated the process, no VPN, reset IP, cleared everything, got shadowbanned within a day.
Meanwhile there are AI and bots just pouring low-effort content and comments across the entire website. “People” scream racial and sexist rants without facing any consequence. Entire communities of hate and sexism running rampant and gaining members.
It’s enough to make a reasonable person feel unreasonably conspiratorial and suspicious.
Ong bro, the reddit admins are basically just non-existent atp, highly doubt they do any work, cuz the AI based permabans are going haywire
Or you spend all of that time writing a well research comment and then realize that you’ve been shadow banned for pointing out that several sexual health/advice communities on there are run by what seem to be serial rapists….
That’s so messed up man :/
This feels like diffamation and harassment. Stick to the facts if you’re going to expose someone
I had screenshots and receipts. I’m not sharing them here, but I invite you to pick your favorite kinky advice community, and flip through some of those moderators histories.
Well in that case… 👀
Their automated banning system has been on the fritz lately. I’ve seen so many [ Removed by Reddit ]s in the last couple months
Ong bro, I highly doubt that even their replies which say “this action was done without the use of automation” are even interacted with by the admins themselves, or any humans at all
Same on Lemmy
Damn, but atleast it’s decentralized here. Getting banned from a server doesn’t get you permabanned, IP banned, device tagged and witch-hunted across the site (as of right now)
Well, it could. You’ll have to switch instances m, but a lot of them could interpret this as ban evading
IP bans are a thing. They’re just not automatic and you get targeted by admins
Damn I see, that make sense. But still, reddit worse (as of right now), hopefully it collapses or people realize the CEO is a pedo who is basically turning it into a facist empire and they switch to another similar app
Haven’t used reddit in a while so I didn’t know that
I just assumed a lot of people here had… controversial opinions or crude language (well, you seem to have some as well)
Ok👍
But IPs are dynamic.
Generally, yes. However, depending on how you get internet, it might be much more difficult to change an IP.
On cable, there is no guarantee that restarting your modem/router will change your IP. Lots of cable ISP have the policy to reassign the same IP as long as the DHCP lease can be renewed.
There are tricks like trying to unplug the modem for a long time, or change enough of its configuration/reset it to get a new lease. Or use a separate router that can change its MAC address.
Even if dynamic, some people can be “stuck” with the same IP for a while. In my case I can have the same one for months.
EDIT: I nearly deleted this comment.
Someone gave some advice on a forum or a blog or something a long time ago that really stuck with me and completely altered my outlook about social media and interacting with people via the internet in general:
Before you hit “send”, ask yourself whether this is for your benefit, or that of those who will see it.
I basically stopped using socials after that, because I seldom thought of anything that followed this rule, and my feed was so full of garbage from people who also didn’t, but saw fit to post it anyway. The internet has given society an ego masturbation problem.
Sometimes I just delete it, sometimes I go ahead and post it and hope nobody responds.
You could open a second account and agree with whatever you wrote.
Or disagree with myself. That would be more interesting. Abusive sock puppeting.
If I was the owner of Reddit, i would 100% save in-progress comments, and keep the unsent ones in the database for my enjoyment.
If I was the owner of Reddit, i would 100% save in-progress comments, and […]
sell the data to AI companies
sell the data to other humans!
how much would you pay to see all the not sent comments of some account? Pretty sure it would be profitable.Imagine reading all the tweets that were never sent…
In all seriousness - I wouldn’t because I value people’s privacy, but I imagine it’d all be quite lucrative with the data economy being what it is.
Wasn’t that implemented once? Or was that a browser feature? I swear at some point what you typed into input comment boxes was saved.
If someone is an obvious tankie or far-right troll, just be like “Lol loser” and never elaborate further.
‘Know your place, trash. Fucking robot.’
Or you can call out bad faith and veiled extremist views in a few words. It only takes a little more effort.
Sometimes that is infinitely better for people reading (who are not in the know) and it still gives the person with the controversial views something to latch on to that inadvertently exposes their beliefs and bad faith further if they keep engaging.
There is no way to reason sense into someone who has reasoned themselves into their mindset. No evidence or proof can change their mind for them.
Any reply on confirms the beliefs of anyone who reads it, regardless of their side on the matter.
There is no way to reason sense into someone who has reasoned themselves into their mindset. No evidence or proof can change their mind for them.
Those are limiting beliefs and I firmly disagree. You can’t change someone’s mind, but they can. We can succinctly give them the information to do so on their own terms.
Any reply on confirms the beliefs of anyone who reads it, regardless of their side on the matter.
Not everybody is operating from a fixed set of beliefs and a narrow perception.
Humanity has a lot of curiosity, if it’s all laid out bare, we can at least stop impressionable people from getting herded into rabbit holes that they don’t understand and being propagandized.
Calling people names and spreading hate only perpetuates the tribalism that you see coloring reality.
True, but a considerable amount of the population has the causes that they will put themself on the cross for, regardless of how wrong it may be.
See flat-earth.
And they should be free to do so. We can still lay the facts bare - so when they are ready to face reality, they are available to them.
Even if their opinion is overall damaging to the opposite mindset?
If a mindset or perspective is vulnerable to the delusions and other breaks from reality of others, perhaps we need to work on expressing ourselves with clarity and confidence - and gather facts for people to consume.
Trust me, in a neutral arena, the truth will always resonate with the majority of people. I’d say the fediverse has pockets that are fairly neutral compared to other discussion boards/websites.
Delusion usually starts from a place of persecution, real or perceived gaslighting, and paranoia and concern. We can address the gaslighting if it does exist, and ease their concern.
“and suddenly you remember most readers of your comment will be bots”
And the few humans there will go “I ain’t reading all that”
Yeah arguing on the Internet is a waste of time which is why I don’t do it much anymore unless I feel very strongly that someone’s reply to my comment needs to be disputed.
Most of the time I make my point then don’t bother responding to any replies. It’s much more pleasant to respond when it’s you’re not arguing, just discussing something interesting.
Yeah arguing on the Internet is a waste of time
No it isn’t.
!!! Wrong! Ths user is INCORRECT on the INTERNET. !!!
You’re obviously a CAPITALIST
+1 for the reference.
Sometimes I commit to online arguments to vent out frustration from irl problems. “The worst that could happen is I get banned.”
Arguing for something you believe in is a thankless job, considering it only changes opinions once every twenty five times, and gets you flak, infinite arguements or insults the other Twenty four times
Happens on this platform too
I’ve written paragraphs and paragraphs about how calling someone stupid is not ad hominem. I’ve gone 20 comments into a thread trying to explain how analogies work. I’m currently in several arguments about the fact that water is, indeed, wet.
“wet - covered or saturated with water or another liquid.”
I gotta go with the people you’re arguing with on this one. Something has to be able to be dry to be able to be wet. Certain liquids can make other things wet, but cannot be wet themselves.
Wet can also mean consisting of liquid. You wouldn’t bat an eye if I said not to touch the wall because the paint is still wet. The inclusion of a clause about something being “able to be dry” is an arbitrary inclusion specifically meant to exclude water itself, not based on how we use the word, but based on a facile desire to force the definition to fit the way you think it should.
I’m gonna do the thing this meme is talking about and just say you’re right.
deleted by creator
The inclusion of a clause about something being “able to be dry” is an arbitrary inclusion specifically meant to exclude water itself, not based on how we use the word, but based on a facile desire to force the definition to fit the way you think it should.
Source?
English is my native language. The phrase “water is wet” is ubiquitous for a reason. I’ll happily link to a particular dictionary, if you promise not to accuse me of cherry-picking.
I found this, but it looks like it’s referring to Old English, not modern, unless I’m misunderstanding. Do you have another source? Just curious at this point; I always considered the “water is wet” thing to just be a common misunderstanding of the actual meaning of the word.
EDIT: It looks like it’s referring to origin, not usage, so I’ll concede your point.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/wet is my favorite source
Works for me.
