Does the reddit style format inherently make for a toxic environment? Or is it a culture of toxicity from the influx of reditors? For lack of a beter example, on stackoverflow, when someone down votes you, it comes with a comment saying how to improve. On mastodon, people can’t downvote you. These platforms are a joy to use, lemmy is depressing if you post. Its depressing because every post or comment, no mater the quality comes with downvotes, and usually no criticism to accompany it, you are left not knowing if youve made a mistake, or if its just trolls, bots, or idiots. At the end you feel insulted not improved. What do you think?
I don’t think it’s the format. Forums generally get toxic when they’re too big. The negative influence of a toxic user is much greater than the positive influence of a non-toxic user. The bigger the user base the more toxic users. Eventually it gets to a critical mass where you’re seeing enough toxic replies to make the whole platform seem toxic.
Reddit is 18 years old. Lots of time to attract toxic users. I wasn’t on Reddit from the start, but people have said Reddit didn’t suffer toxicity until after it was around 10 years old. Lemmy is four years old now so it will be a while. Though Lemmy may attract a smaller less toxic crowd and avoid toxicity indefinitely.
I don’t have a high opinion of community at Stack Overflow as it started out elitist by nature of its policies and rules. Yeah that’s going to breed toxicity right out of the gate. I have to admit Stack Overflow has been a really good resource for technical information at times, but its community is harsh. As much as I’ve used it to find good technical information, I’ve never made an account there or had any desire to post there.
For lack of a beter example, on stackoverflow, when someone down votes you, it comes with a comment saying how to improve. … These platforms are a joy to use
I don’t know what part of the internet you are from, but where I am from, Stackoverflow is looked down on as the quintessential example of toxic behaviour.
I’ve found some of the most dismissive people in tiny stack exchange groups, and experienced similar unexplained downvotes.
What SO, Reddit, and Lemmy maybe all have in common I think, is people tend to agree or disagree based on their convictions, as opposed to agreeing or disagreeing as a means of interaction.
I guess this puts the conflict and disagreement front and center. But at least then I know where people stand.
Perhaps it’s important to not take opinions too personally, and remember that incencere agreement has its own problems.
I disagree about SO, though I am not a fan of it for other reasons. Interesting thought about acting on convictions. Thanks.
People on Lemmy try to rationalize that they’ll use the downvote as intended (off topic content) but our ape brains eventually just make downvote = I don’t like said thing.
I wish we could do away with upvotes and downvotes altogether.
I agree. Upvotes and downvotes are rubbish.
Not necessarily toxicity, but echo chambers. Echo chambers could then be used to be toxic.
At least here in the free world we have to manually build echo chambers and “The Algorithm” does not build them around us without our consent.
Thankfully the instance I’m on doesn’t have downvotes. I find what leads to toxic communities is when admins don’t remove toxic content or users.
This too. The main reason good mastodon instances are good is that they’re strictly curated
Exactly. No rules leads to the worst of the worst.
Just post what you want to post and ignore the votes. A few downvotes is to be expected. Try not to read into them so much.
Alternative way to think about it: 10% of people are insufferable assholes. Do you want them to be happy with what you say?
It’s a distilled version of ‘the wisdom of the crowds’. With all the dog piling that comes with reactions to things that are pointed at the wrong audience. There’s generally some people with baggage in there somewhere who will take issue, and you get downvoted.
However, what’s always interesting about these platforms is where good ideas rise, where they come from, and how controversial they are, all of which you lose with the twitter/mastodon architecture.
It may be easier to find your crowd, but how useful is that to you depends on what you use your online presence for.
Good Take
The only place on here that I’ve noticed downvotes is on comments that have been obviously social media shills (reddit or meta) or right wing type comments that are not the type of thing a community should support in my opinion. I’m not saying you’re doing either of those things and if you’re being downvoted in another context I don’t know why.
That said, downvotes shouldn’t really get you down. If you’ve said something awful then you deserve them and should reassess your outlook if you were unaware that your views or attitude were unpleasant. If you’re getting downvoted on a tech related thing then I don’t know what that’s all about but I would try not to worry about it too much because it doesn’t really affect your life, it’s just a fake internet down arrow.
Thank you, interestingly the thing that prompted me to ask was a tech joke, all (4) down-votes, I removed a jab at Apple and added a picture and the the responses was positive. The lesson must be one of these: That we have mostly strong apple fans here; jokes need a picture even if it does not add anything; or people look at the vote total to decide their mindset while reading and the first vote was down by bad luck. Or some combination of these.
During my time on reddit, I’ve learnt to appreciate downvotes. Silent feedback is much better than passive-aggressive replies that serve no purpose other than letting the person vent out.
idk, it sounds good, but to me its a lot like getting a grade with no comments (for the sake of example)
As a former Redditor, I can only say that I’ve not yet begun looking at votes. Why do you determine the value of your post based on that? Make your post, read and respond to people who comment and have a great day.
That is the trap, isnt it. Votes are an awful metric for approval, and approval inst always needed.
It is a problem of an Eternal September. Reddit was set up where the downvote was supposed to mean more than just disagreeing with people, but the influx of users, especially those only participating with Reddit by upvoting and downvoting, couldn’t be taught what you were supposed to do.
Eternal September
i genuinely love that i had to look that up, and i learned something! Thanks!
Downvotes are not a reflection on you, they are a representation of how much everyone else agrees or disagrees.
I don’t personally want the downvotes hidden or removed like how it is on Youtube.
they did remove downvotes on youtube tho :(
This is why I’m in favor. I’m not the hugest fan, but if the alternative is YouTube or facebooks like system then I’ll take the downvotes. Otherwise you get the low quality like farms where minions memes are uploaded everywhere and there’s no way to say “we hate these, stop posting them”
lol that is a very good point
I would always cringe so hard whenever I saw someone on reddit talking about downvotes, lack of upvotes, or karma at all. It’s silly. Quit worrying about it.
Don’t change the way you express yourself just to make yourself more acceptable to the internet hivemind. The internet is a toxic place. Lots of people simply find joy in anonymously hurting others. Just comment and move on. And maybe reply to comments that are made in good faith.
Thanks for the advice
I’m thinking you care too much about the thoughtless reactions of anonymous strangers.
Remember… In this game, the points don’t matter.its strange because its not the disapproval that gets me, its not knowing why. I guess the lesson is that if someone did not even say why, its not really something anyone actually cared about.
This is exactly it. They don’t care about your post or you or anyone really. For them, it just feels good to bring down others.
i hope/believe that the intent is rarely malicious, that its not really a significant thing at all on that side.
Yearning for affirmations via fake internet points is the toxic part, not the format of a website.
Yes, although your comment seems to me to be correct, it misses the point of the question, and the actual question has been answered quite well already by others. Surely the format is not in and of itself toxic, and I personally find it a little strange to think of a format as toxic, though I suppose one could create such a format. Rather, the question is weather the format of the website encourages or indues so called “toxic” behavior or leads to the perception there of, among groups of humans using software in the format in question. Maybe because “yearning for affirmation” is a near universal human trait and the format of the site provides its human users access to a convenient but unreliable metric by which they may measure the approval of their peers. Some of us suppress this drive for approval with to strong self awareness or self esteem or lack it entirely due to mental illness, but it is in almost every human, and of course, our need for approval is of course a double edged blade. It makes society possible, and makes us hate to take part at times.
