Great writing on the current Reddit saga. The author put down in words a lot of things in my mind I couldn’t find the right words.

  • manitcor@lemmy.intai.tech
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    As karma mattered more you lost a whole subset of regular posters that felt kamra took a relaxing pastime and made it into a job. Karma was used as a kind of stopgap for the issue of managing the cacophony in a busy thread, which made the points matter even more and caused even more people to disengage.

    • RandomBit@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Personally, I found that karma led to self-censorship of any idea that remotely deviated from the group consensus.

      • manitcor@lemmy.intai.tech
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Ofc! whats the point of posting anything when you have people actively work to suppress your thoughts and statements?

        Really user-based meta-moderation had been pretty much a disaster, not sure we need internet points at all, things worked great without them.

      • Honeyed Coffee@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Can you think of alternatives to voting, though? Sorting always requires some curating system that isn’t random but I can’t think of any that would be robust to group consensus

        • RandomBit@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          I don’t think user voting in of itself is a problem. It’s the consequences of large negative voting that causes the real problems. In Reddit, a single unpopular comment on a popular subreddit could send a casual Redditor into negative karma which effectively shadowbans them from Reddit. As a result, you see people deleting their comments to stop the bleeding. Controversial opinions are punished severely.