• bermuda
      link
      fedilink
      1311 months ago

      This + I like to just give people answers. I find too often online somebody will ask a question and a lot of users will often try to be helpful but fail because they didn’t actually answer it.

      Dumb example Q: “What’s the best Indian food in this city?” A: “There’s not a whole lot of Indian food but you might have luck with a burgeoning southeast Asian store”

  • @ThatsMrCharlieToYou@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    6711 months ago

    If people would interact with others as they would do face to face. For whatever reason, we are so quick to forget the person at the other end. You’ll see people complain or discuss real people with literally no empathy and it can be mind boggling at times.

    • yeehaw
      link
      fedilink
      2311 months ago

      This is sadly so true. I think part of it too is that text is a poor medium for expression at times. For example, it’s harder to read sarcasm.

      • radix
        link
        fedilink
        611 months ago

        I find this to be less of a problem in less formal spaces. When typos, capitalization, and memes all get incorporated into the dialect, sarcasm and other nuance comes across much more readily. See also: Tumblr.

        I suspect that sort of dialect wouldn’t be as comprehensible here though, because of the greater diversity in demographics here than Tumblr or my small closed group chats with friends. Here on Lemmy, I try to mitigate this by giving the benefit of the doubt and never ever feeding the trolls.

        (Does downvoting a troll count as feeding it, because it gives them attention? I don’t want to risk it, so I usually pass them by, but I’m curious as to people’s consensus here.)

    • TheHalc
      link
      fedilink
      711 months ago

      Part of the challenge of social media is that it leads you to interact with many more people than you ever could in normal life.

      While the vast majority of people are delightful, there are significant numbers of people with whom I wouldn’t want to interact, either face-to-face or online.

      One thing I should get better at is avoiding engagement with those people online who I wouldn’t benefit from interacting with.

      I don’t talk to the crazy person ranting on the street, why would I do it online?

    • wilberfan
      link
      fedilink
      English
      211 months ago

      This is precisely the problem, yes. As a mod in my one sub, this is most often the only time I had to intervene – when the tone of the conversation got rude, insulting, disrespectful. I would always think to myself, “Is that how you’d talk to that guy in person??”. Mind boggling, indeed.

  • @arcrust@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    4011 months ago

    Downvoted unkind discourse.

    Upvote is for quality. No vote is for noise/disagreements. Downvote is for hate.

    In theory, the lower a score, the less people see something. If I disagree with something that’s said (like a civil political opinion), then I won’t ‘like’ it. That takes away one potential point. But if someone is being unkind to others (mean, rude, trolling, etc) then I’ll downvote, which I see as removing two votes. The one they could have had from me, and one from someone else. Hopefully, that means they won’t get as much attention.

    If it’s really bad, then I’ll also report

    • @maegul@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1511 months ago

      Upvote is for quality. No vote is for noise/disagreements. Downvote is for hate.

      Yep. This, I think, “is the way”. The downvote for disagreement is not a good pattern and probably never was IMO. This is a good way of putting it. Another way someone else put it was essentially that the downvote is about the way in which something is said and the upvote is about whether you agree with it.

      I honestly think separating them out in some way, so that we can still use the downvote as an effective tool of aggregating the quality of a post, but not in a way that is simply there to offset upvotes. Like, maybe two “scores”, number of upvotes and number of down votes with different filters for each? In a way, the “controversial” sort achieves something like this.

  • @Macaroni_ninja@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    23
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    It’s not a life hack, but I try to be polite and open with people to a reasonable extent. I turned around several internet arguments with this attitude, even when we had a different opinion at the end there was no toxicity.

    There are always the unreasonable idiots and straight up crazies and of course the trolls. Well fuck those people, just block them 👍

  • @Karmmah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    2211 months ago

    Since switching to Lemmy I use my up/downvote in a different way than on reddit. Upvote now means I think the comment/post contributes something valuable while downvote means the comment/post is unnecessarily unfriendly or just not contributing anything constructive.

    • @incogtino@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      28
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Typical Reddit voting v Lemmy voting

      Reddit Lemmy
      I agree Upvote Upvote
      I disagree, but it contributes to the conversation Downvote Upvote
      Meh Downvote -
      Trolling and bad faith arguments Upvote Downvote
      • @Karmmah@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        311 months ago

        This is the way. Maybe this should be shown to everyone who signs up and everyone should be reminded once in a while to keep up this system.

    • @Gork@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      11
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      That’s what they were originally about on Reddit as well before its gradual decline. “Reddiquette” as they called it.

      Unfortunately it turned into an “I agree” or “I disagree” button.

      • @maegul@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        111 months ago

        Yea … I said it above, but I think separating the up and down votes so that they don’t contribute to the same “score” might help. Make the downvote a separate process of basically softly and quickly reporting a post/comment for being out of line.

    • @Mane25@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      311 months ago

      What I, at least in theory, try to do is upvote everyone I’m replying to even if I’m replying to disagree - because if I’ve replied then by definition it has contributed to the conversation. It gives your reply better visibility as well. It’s really hard to do sometimes though.

  • @Fizz@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    2011 months ago

    When I see people going through something that resonates with me I acknowledge that its hard and encourage them to keep trying and that they will make it to the otherside.

    • @evatronic@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      711 months ago

      I do this, and employ frequent and rapid blocking on social media.

      Instead of engaging, dick wads get blocked without comment.

  • Troy
    link
    fedilink
    1211 months ago

    Radical optimism. Hell yeah! Basically anti-doomerism.