You are correct that downvoting is kind of pointless.
On the other hand, there has been a bunch of accounts attending this forum lately which appear to act in bad faith (e.g. pathologising and not being interested in the ND point of view, stirring up emotions, sealioning). Interacting with such people will likely lead to a fruitless discussion that just draws energy. These people could look up the non-pathologising resources which were posted already if they were interested.
We probably should be aware that there are indeed people who are really scared of any changes to their pathologic-normative competitive model of society. Scared so much that they will get to aggressive efforts to counteract any healing efforts. It probably boils down to the question, “what to do with cognitive dissonance?”
I’m now inclined to not argue/compete but just check someone’s sincerety by asking like, “what is your function in society and what would perhaps be your natural function according to your set of traits, and how can this serve a cure and sustainable future for human civilisation?” (thanks @[email protected] for originally posting this link)
Re-posting and amending this with my other account, as this is supposed to be the more lucid one.
… And yeah, i am aware that the OP account we are responding to has to date only made this single comment in this forum.
Thanks for the reply. I usually prefer not to comment, but the thread parent comment was so antagonistic that I first typed out a scathing reply, but then had a moment where I just went “But why?” instead.
I don’t think that bad faith actors actually take the effort out of a place of fear. Instead I think trolling is just for its own sake - if in a moment of clarity someone thinks “Why?” they’d see there’s no point to it. I can’t imagine that anyone would be afraid of something that affects them so little. Autism treatments and lifestyle adjustments seem very far from the usual polarising topics trending today. Its like getting angry your local supermarket added a wheelchair ramp.
Do you think heavier moderation can help in weeding out bad faith actors or will that stifle opposing opinions too much?
Autism treatments and lifestyle adjustments seem very far from the usual polarising topics trending today. Its like getting angry your local supermarket added a wheelchair ramp.
A supermarket in Switzerland started a silent shopping hour twice a week. You can’t imagine how many people argued against it…
I think that heavy moderation (moderators stepping in with warnings, locks, bans) should be a last resort. I wish for more soft moderation in that the regular subscribers could a job to really act as a kind of community they claim to be have been falsely labeled. Most such ill-informed opinions could be countered by pointing to previously made posts which contain some relevant links, for example.
You are correct that downvoting is kind of pointless.
On the other hand, there has been a bunch of accounts attending this forum lately which appear to act in bad faith (e.g. pathologising and not being interested in the ND point of view, stirring up emotions, sealioning). Interacting with such people will likely lead to a fruitless discussion that just draws energy. These people could look up the non-pathologising resources which were posted already if they were interested.
We probably should be aware that there are indeed people who are really scared of any changes to their pathologic-normative competitive model of society. Scared so much that they will get to aggressive efforts to counteract any healing efforts. It probably boils down to the question, “what to do with cognitive dissonance?”
I’m now inclined to not argue/compete but just check someone’s sincerety by asking like, “what is your function in society and what would perhaps be your natural function according to your set of traits, and how can this serve a cure and sustainable future for human civilisation?” (thanks @[email protected] for originally posting this link)
Re-posting and amending this with my other account, as this is supposed to be the more lucid one.
… And yeah, i am aware that the OP account we are responding to has to date only made this single comment in this forum.
Thanks for the reply. I usually prefer not to comment, but the thread parent comment was so antagonistic that I first typed out a scathing reply, but then had a moment where I just went “But why?” instead.
I don’t think that bad faith actors actually take the effort out of a place of fear. Instead I think trolling is just for its own sake - if in a moment of clarity someone thinks “Why?” they’d see there’s no point to it. I can’t imagine that anyone would be afraid of something that affects them so little. Autism treatments and lifestyle adjustments seem very far from the usual polarising topics trending today. Its like getting angry your local supermarket added a wheelchair ramp.
Do you think heavier moderation can help in weeding out bad faith actors or will that stifle opposing opinions too much?
A supermarket in Switzerland started a silent shopping hour twice a week. You can’t imagine how many people argued against it…
Interesting, what does it mean … do they just turn off the speakers or are people asked to be quiet, too?
They turn down speakers and the beeping at the checkout as well as lights. And yes, people are asked to speak in a low voice.
Feels nice 🙂
… one more thought … if there are many who complain about it, the ones who are happy about it should also raise their opinions.
I think that heavy moderation (moderators stepping in with warnings, locks, bans) should be a last resort. I wish for more soft moderation in that the regular subscribers could a job to really act as a kind of community they
claim to behave been falsely labeled. Most such ill-informed opinions could be countered by pointing to previously made posts which contain some relevant links, for example.