Explain Like I'm Five

14495 readers

11 users here now

Simplifying Complexity, One Answer at a Time!

Rules

Be respectful and inclusive.
No harassment, hate speech, or trolling.
Engage in constructive discussions.
Share relevant content.
Follow guidelines and moderators' instructions.
Use appropriate language and tone.
Report violations.
Foster a continuous learning environment.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

sabbah@lemmy.world

AradFort@lemmy.world

rikudou@lemmings.world

Don_Dickle@lemmy.world

Rikudou_Sage@lemmy.world

-13

The case for down voting/anonymous social negativity to strangers (lemmy.world)

submitted 3 days ago by j4k3@lemmy.world to c/explainlikeimfive@lemmy.world

30 comments fedilink hide all child comments

This place seems dead. I was skimming some stuff to make a few posts, after posting a basic casual conversation, the negativity shut me down like usual. I am sitting here with 5 tabs and some interesting stuff, but I'm totally disinterested in trying or even spending any more time here this evening. What value does that add for anyone when this place is dying a slow death of disinterest and low engagement? I never add negativity. I only ignore and block. I never discourage because I know I would be shooting myself in the foot. Why is this not fundamentally standard logic for everyone. If you disagree about opinions, appreciate diversity and ignore or better yet discuss. Anonymous negativity to strangers is psychotic behavior that should never have existed in the first place. It is not normal. It is no different that walking up to a stranger in a supermarket and yelling at them for what they wear or how they talk. That is crazy stupid.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] eldavi@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

People's opinions are expressions of who they are and unwelcomed opinions feel like attacks for people unaccustomed to debate. Westerners; especially Americans; don't like taking about "politics" in polite conversation so an overwhelming majority will remain unaccustomed to debate.

I agree that .world has low engagement as do all of the other non-political & non-technical Lemmy instances do and that fact is treated like another one of those unwelcomed opinions in those instances; that's why you're getting downvotes for pointing this out.

Lemmy was invented by and for people who exist at the intersection of leftist politics and open source technology and that makes them more amenable for debate but it could only work for you if you're capable of comporting yourself accordingly in such spaces if those views don't come naturally to you. If your politics or interest are too far out of sync with this core group of Lemmy users, then you either have to wait until the other social media platforms enshitify enough to force more people into Lemmy or go back to the enshitification yourself on their platforms.

[–] j4k3@lemmy.world -3 points 2 days ago

I find it highly offensive when anyone tells me what I think or believe. You have no right to speak in my voice or write my narrative.

I love to debate. I love to learn and take in new information and perspectives. To assume is to make an ass-u-me. Do not assume you know me at all unless you have asked questions and are quoting or paraphrasing my statements in the context I made them.

I am not in any way resistant to negative feedback. I want to engage with people that are open minded and flexible in their thinking. Those that have a rigid mindset and parrot some narrative on the right or left are religious fools I waste no time with. Arguing belief systems is a fool's folly.

I take offense at anonymizing negative feedback. This is not accepted or normal human behavior. It is the realm of criminals and cowards to stab people in the back without the opportunity to confront their assailant. I do not accept this criminality as normal. If you wish to have a counter opinion you must do so openly and debate and defend your opinion. Anything less is barbaric primitivism.