It has a similar problem, but a better version of it.
From my point of view, Lemmy creates its bubble just by being friendly to one subset of views and hostile to another; and so people with some subsets of views don’t feel welcome - and they leave. This creates a kind of bubble effect; but I’m ok with that - because frankly there are some views that I really don’t want to see here anyway. Having diversity of views is good, but establishing social norms about what is acceptable or unacceptable isn’t necessarily a bad thing either.
On the other hand Reddit (in addition to the above effect) also has a big dose of top-down enforcement. Effectively it has a small hidden group of people who can control what everyone else is allowed to say. They can ban certain words and sentiments; and use techniques like shadowbanning or just algorithmic demoting to reduce the influence of stuff they don’t like. So they get a bubble as well, but the bubble can be guided and influenced by the people who control the platform. For my point of view, that makes it worse.
Lemmy.ml bans you for shit and giggles, basically if you don’t agree that murderous dictators are the future, you will very likely be banned. If you’re new to Lemmy and happen to stumble upon .ml first (and are not a red fascist), you’ll get the same treatment.
Lemmy.ml is still a big instance, so chances of this happening are pretty high.
I read that as “murdering dictators is the future” and was like… I’m not all caught up on .ml, but I didn’t think they’d be down with murdering dictators. Then I realized I read it wrong.
It has a similar problem, but a better version of it.
From my point of view, Lemmy creates its bubble just by being friendly to one subset of views and hostile to another; and so people with some subsets of views don’t feel welcome - and they leave. This creates a kind of bubble effect; but I’m ok with that - because frankly there are some views that I really don’t want to see here anyway. Having diversity of views is good, but establishing social norms about what is acceptable or unacceptable isn’t necessarily a bad thing either.
On the other hand Reddit (in addition to the above effect) also has a big dose of top-down enforcement. Effectively it has a small hidden group of people who can control what everyone else is allowed to say. They can ban certain words and sentiments; and use techniques like shadowbanning or just algorithmic demoting to reduce the influence of stuff they don’t like. So they get a bubble as well, but the bubble can be guided and influenced by the people who control the platform. For my point of view, that makes it worse.
Lemmy.ml bans you for shit and giggles, basically if you don’t agree that murderous dictators are the future, you will very likely be banned. If you’re new to Lemmy and happen to stumble upon .ml first (and are not a red fascist), you’ll get the same treatment.
Lemmy.ml is still a big instance, so chances of this happening are pretty high.
I read that as “murdering dictators is the future” and was like… I’m not all caught up on .ml, but I didn’t think they’d be down with murdering dictators. Then I realized I read it wrong.
Changed it to murderous to avoid confusion, it did read a little weird.
Can agree with this. Don’t disagree with the Israelis. You will get at least a temp ban.