334
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 06 Sep 2023
334 points (93.5% liked)
Technology
59287 readers
4373 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I don't know, every time I read a headline with the word "could" in it I'm not interested, because there are no facts in it it's just speculation.
the list goes on and on.
That could be a good point
That could be a smart comment
I could kiss all of you for making me smile!
Then read the article and not just the headline. There are various examples of why that's happening.
Your examples are just funny, but when (good) journalists write "could", it means that they have analyzed something and they are predicting its outcome based on the data they have collected. It's not like they're just making stuff up
fuck reddit; isn't this just what voting is for? i don't want mods at all, ideally, i want to see what other people posted without anyone getting authority to say 'achshully'
Clearly competent moderators have some sort of effect, or these stories would not exist. If self-moderation worked, then the dangerous canning post mentioned in the article wouldn’t have gained any traction.
Without competent moderation, the ability for users to manipulate or derail communities grows. A voting system is entirely subjective, and a bad or dangerous idea can set roots if enough unaware people give it the votes. I am aware that moderation is also subjective, but competent, knowledgeable mods can help guide a community, or protect it from targeted harassment.
Also, they’re the ones with no life who can devote their time to monitoring the community. Most people spend a few minutes at a time visiting a community. That’s not enough time to verify every post in the last 24 hours, and vote for them all accordingly (depending on the size of the community of course),
Well, that's the same as saying "I don't believe in Science because it's just theories".
Argumenting-by-dictionary, about the words selected for the title - i.e. the form of only the title - says nothing at all about the quality or lack thereof of the actual content of the article itself.
Or to put things another way, you put forward a theory (the article is just speculation) and then tried to support it by argumenting about appearences (the presence or not of a very specific word) on something (the title) barelly related to the actual article much less the article's contents.
Not only is arguing that "the presence of a specific word in the title means the whole article is speculation" incredibly reductionist (mindbogglingly so), it's not even logical.