LMlurker
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 1 de Ago, 2021
I was browsing the Rowling Derangement Syndrome thread and I realized that new, different users have been exchanging the same 5 or 6 circular talking points/arguments for the multiple years I've followed the thread. You find that in most of the culture war threads, people sharing the same opinions other people already shared over and over again.
"I don't have any sympathy for Rowling because she's a libtard"
"Well you should have sympathy for her because xyz".
I don't have any concrete suggestions on how to solve this problem. It obviously comes from people posting without reading, but if you make it harder to post then the quantity of good new content falls as well. But it does seem like a problem that the more algorithmic websites don't have as bad; it feels like those websites can have a few months of controversy about any given issue, then everybody figures out where they stand and the arguments die down.
The only solutions I can think of are pie-in-the-sky schemes like a Special Economic Zone board that tests out a new forum structure that mimics the post/comment section divide other sites use. That's obviously a lot of work; A&N kind of works that way, but it consists of reposts of articles rather than original writing or research.
I'm talking about a structure where it's like "Post title: Bossman Jack is running up a huge jackpot" with attached comments
The benefit of that kind of system is that it makes it easier to tell where the high effort content-posting is vs the low effort reaction-posting. But you have to have some algorithm (upvotes, keywords, etc) to prevent the spam posts from drowning out the good ones, and that feels maybe a little antithetical to the site. It's a lot less collaborative, and it divides users more firmly into posters and commenters. Then again, it seems like there's already unofficially a divide between the people who post screenshots and clips vs the people who react to them.
The highlights system kinda works for this, but you tend to get a lot of opinion-based highlights that you then have to hunt down the context for.
Anyway, the ooverlord is shaking things up. What do you guys think? Do the circular arguments and the signal/noise ratio bother you too? Is there a lightweight way to fix it?
"I don't have any sympathy for Rowling because she's a libtard"
"Well you should have sympathy for her because xyz".
I don't have any concrete suggestions on how to solve this problem. It obviously comes from people posting without reading, but if you make it harder to post then the quantity of good new content falls as well. But it does seem like a problem that the more algorithmic websites don't have as bad; it feels like those websites can have a few months of controversy about any given issue, then everybody figures out where they stand and the arguments die down.
The only solutions I can think of are pie-in-the-sky schemes like a Special Economic Zone board that tests out a new forum structure that mimics the post/comment section divide other sites use. That's obviously a lot of work; A&N kind of works that way, but it consists of reposts of articles rather than original writing or research.
I'm talking about a structure where it's like "Post title: Bossman Jack is running up a huge jackpot" with attached comments
The benefit of that kind of system is that it makes it easier to tell where the high effort content-posting is vs the low effort reaction-posting. But you have to have some algorithm (upvotes, keywords, etc) to prevent the spam posts from drowning out the good ones, and that feels maybe a little antithetical to the site. It's a lot less collaborative, and it divides users more firmly into posters and commenters. Then again, it seems like there's already unofficially a divide between the people who post screenshots and clips vs the people who react to them.
The highlights system kinda works for this, but you tend to get a lot of opinion-based highlights that you then have to hunt down the context for.
Anyway, the ooverlord is shaking things up. What do you guys think? Do the circular arguments and the signal/noise ratio bother you too? Is there a lightweight way to fix it?
Última edición por un moderador:
