I mean, we didn’t need science to know that, but it’s nice to have confirmation. It’s been proven before that arguing and debating can also be addictive.
My pet theory is it’s exacerbated by the “like” button phenomena. Most people are naturally driven to pettiness and will generally take any opportunity to exert control over others, however insignificant, much like mods on Reddit going power crazy the way they do. They will search for and take pleasure in anything that confirms their bias. The mere presence of, or the the ability to upvote and downvote things, gives people an incentive to attempt to “win” the argument. Just look at Twitter, for example. If you get more comments than likes, people will relish the “ratio” because of the implication.
On Reddit, people use the downvote button as a disagree button, even though that’s not what it’s for. As a matter of fact, there is objectively nothing that downvoting accomplishes that would not also be accomplished by simply leaving undesired content at a neutral score. Literally nothing would change, because highly downvoted comments are still seen regardless and upvoted posts would still supersede neutral posts.
In other breaking news, snow is in fact white!
I can turn it yellow.
I think one can simply replace “Reddit” with “online” here. They might have done their studies on Reddit, but I expect the same behavior in any online place.
I disagree
I saw tourist@lemmy.world at a grocery store in Los Angeles yesterday. I told him how cool it was to meet him in person, but I didn’t want to be a douche and bother him and ask him for photos or anything.
He said, “Oh, like you’re doing now?”
I was taken aback, and all I could say was “Huh?” but he kept cutting me off and going “huh? huh? huh?” and closing his hand shut in front of my face. I walked away and continued with my shopping, and I heard him chuckle as I walked off. When I came to pay for my stuff up front I saw him trying to walk out the doors with like fifteen Milky Ways in his hands without paying.
The girl at the counter was very nice about it and professional, and was like “Sir, you need to pay for those first.” At first he kept pretending to be tired and not hear her, but eventually turned back around and brought them to the counter.
When she took one of the bars and started scanning it multiple times, he stopped her and told her to scan them each individually “to prevent any electrical infetterence,” and then turned around and winked at me. I don’t even think that’s a word. After she scanned each bar and put them in a bag and started to say the price, he kept interrupting her by yawning really loudly.
I love this pasta so much
It’s like reading a cartoon.
You’re wrong! And you should feel bad!
I feel bad all the time 😎
No they don’t.
Wow, groundbreaking research!
Next they’ll tell me that people on the internet have strong opinions they don’t mind sharing!
Observation has proved man’s contrary nature way before this.
Just leave that dogshit site. Lemmy is the way, before the cycle repeats itself, like it always does.
I love how this used to be attributed to anonymity. Then big sites with comment sections made use of real names mandatory and… nothing changed, the same people still happily spew their hateful drivel and propaganda. They’re fucking proud of it.
That’s a great point. That anonymity argument was everywhere in web1.0. Now you never hear about it.
Never take an online discussion to heart, the second you do you’ve already lost.
Was there ever any doubt?
I myself like to argue things just to argue them. It’s a good way to find out if I’m right, or to learn thing I didn’t know, and correct my misunderstandings.
But I know that’s not everyone’s idea of a good time.
No we don’t. That’s a lie. 🤣
