• bstix@feddit.dk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      4 months ago

      There are some who say it’s biased itself. I have not investigated it further.

      All bots are annoying. They take screen real estate and lures me into otherwise empty comment sections. I should block it, but I haven’t, because it is sometimes useful.

      It might be better if it only posted when summoned by someone.

      • ℍ𝕂-𝟞𝟝@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        4 months ago

        Maybe Lemmy could support bot posts a bit more organically, so they could be excluded from comment counts, or given a dedicated section. Eg. there could be a way to add this info to all community posts automatically.

        TBH this whole bot thing seems like a Reddit holdover where people had no control over the platform.

    • FundMECFSResearchOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Because the information is quite badly sourced in some ways and includes a lot of caveats. And the moderators of the subreddit have not added said caveats to the bot message.

      • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        Would you downvote a bot that said the rotten tomatoes score in every post in a sub about movies?

        Personally I think rotten tomatoes is a terrible guide to tell if a movie is good… But I still cant see why id downvote it, it is just extra information I can ignore if wanted.

        • FundMECFSResearchOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Bad comparison. Rotten Tomatoes is user generated. And opinions on movies have much less reprocussions than opinion on news sources. Rotten tomatoes makes clear it is the “opinion” on the movie.

          MBFC is some random guy with no credential’s opinion. But they present their opinion as a neutral impartial rating.

          Also I don’t downvote, disabled on my instance, just saying why others might.

          • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            Some random guy may not be the best, but also a hivemind can often be just as bad. For instance if lemmy.ca ranked news sources, and lemmy.ml ranked the same news sources, I imagine the results would be different.

            I agree the impact is different for sure, I just used the first “ranked” system that came to mind that I figured you would be familiar with.

            Example. If you rank Empire Strike back a 5/10 and I rank it a 8/10, then we rank Avatar and I give it a 4/10 and you give it a 9/10, on imdb they would both be ranked a 6.5/10. on RT one would be a 100% and the other 50%. (Why I don’t care for RT)

            But your right, not a fair comparison

            • catloaf@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              4 months ago

              Also, movies are entertainment, not misinformation and disinformation shaping our society, so there’s less scrutiny.

              (Yeah, media shapes our views too, but not as much as direct news journalism.)

    • acockworkorange@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 months ago

      Personally, I like the bots but I want their messages below the human messages. And since voting scores mean next to nothing in lemmy, there’s no harm.

    • ThrowawayPermanente@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 months ago

      Nobody likes being told they and their favorite sources are biased, they think they’re the only ones who can see clearly and it’s everyone else who is biased.