Unpopular Opinion
Welcome to the Unpopular Opinion community!
How voting works:
Vote the opposite of the norm.
If you agree that the opinion is unpopular give it an arrow up. If it's something that's widely accepted, give it an arrow down.
Guidelines:
Tag your post, if possible (not required)
- If your post is a "General" unpopular opinion, start the subject with [GENERAL].
- If it is a Lemmy-specific unpopular opinion, start it with [LEMMY].
Rules:
1. NO POLITICS
Politics is everywhere. Let's make this about [general] and [lemmy] - specific topics, and keep politics out of it.
2. Be civil.
Disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally attack others. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Please also refrain from gatekeeping others' opinions.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Shitposts and memes are allowed but...
Only until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.
5. No trolling.
This shouldn't need an explanation. If your post or comment is made just to get a rise with no real value, it will be removed. You do this too often, you will get a vacation to touch grass, away from this community for 1 or more days. Repeat offenses will result in a perma-ban.
Instance-wide rules always apply. https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/
view the rest of the comments
There are two keys to success for an internet community:
This has not changed since the 90s. It's the reason that any community devoted to "world news" or "politics", whether it be here or on the R-site or anywhere else, is destined be a train wreck whereas one on "gardening" or "classic BMWs" or whatever will generally be pleasant.
Fair-minded moderation is what turns a cesspool into a merely unpleasant hangout, or a decent community into a great one.
IMO the gold standard for a successful community is clearly Hacker News, which (logically) combines a well-defined purpose with top-notch moderation. Rather than just deleting comments and handing out bans, the moderator there intervenes in discussions to push them back on course, often in a plaintive manner that appeals to people's good sides. The positive results of this approach were even the subject of a feature article in the New Yorker.
This is a not a technical problem as much as a human one. Restrict the bounds of conversation, then take a smart approach to moderation. Success will follow.