Considering a big problem with conversion on Reddit is people just reacting to the headline I’d say it’s a win. I’ve noticed here when people do comment it’s more nuanced because they actually read the article.
I love it too :-)
On specific subjects, where I really want my mind or the content like pics etc, because "important " for me (trans, Gaza), i click the link though
Also, I’m often like…
there’s one comment and I generally don’t agree with it, but I also don’t want to make an ass of myself, so let’s skim that article first and pick some good parts to slam this dude with.
Often I find that I was wrong.
I wonder if the reason for this is not due to having less comments, but instead because Lemmy simply has a different demographic. For one, I’ve noticed significantly fewer bad-faith arguments compared to on Reddit. And discussions topics that would have otherwise been trolled to hell and back ended up having reasonably impartial conversations.
I’ve read that Lemmy users are generally fairly old, compared to users from other social media. I wonder if that has a role in how discussions play out on Lemmy
Not really. People may talk shit about comments, but if it was just a matter of getting just articles, you might as well stick to the news sites. Even as far as pure news aggregation goes there are better options than relying on whatever a handful people decide to share here.
There’s value in public commentary too. It may not be as polished as these articles but it provides a variety of perspectives, questions and criticism that might be pertinent, and for as lacking or biased as they may be, it’s much easier to tell compared to sources trying to pretend impartiality.
There’s a reason why we are here and not on, say, Feedly. This particular community only highlights it further, since it’s entirely based on the interpersonal element. Ain’t nobody looking for journalism or scientific articles on !Showerthoughts
100%. i’d be more interested in knowing what some guys in a bar in NYC were saying when hitler died versus reading an article about it. articles are just facts put in order. biased opinions make us human.
A great thing about Reddit is that because of its size you would sometimes get an expert in that field or even the person who wrote the paper popping up. It wasn’t crazy common but did happen a decent bit.
That is ofc balanced by it being full of complete assholes who have no idea what they’re talking about.
In a way, thats a win, no ?
Considering a big problem with conversion on Reddit is people just reacting to the headline I’d say it’s a win. I’ve noticed here when people do comment it’s more nuanced because they actually read the article.
The article summary bot helps my lazy ass lol
Hey nothing wrong with that. I like it myself
Though often the bot skips important parts and make the story confusing.
I love it too :-) On specific subjects, where I really want my mind or the content like pics etc, because "important " for me (trans, Gaza), i click the link though
Also, I’m often like… there’s one comment and I generally don’t agree with it, but I also don’t want to make an ass of myself, so let’s skim that article first and pick some good parts to slam this dude with. Often I find that I was wrong.
I wonder if the reason for this is not due to having less comments, but instead because Lemmy simply has a different demographic. For one, I’ve noticed significantly fewer bad-faith arguments compared to on Reddit. And discussions topics that would have otherwise been trolled to hell and back ended up having reasonably impartial conversations.
I’ve read that Lemmy users are generally fairly old, compared to users from other social media. I wonder if that has a role in how discussions play out on Lemmy
Except with some libs/racists/etc but yeah I agree for the majority.
There are plenty of posts on Lemmy where many of the commenters clearly didn’t read the article. It just depends on how click-baity the title is.
Not really. People may talk shit about comments, but if it was just a matter of getting just articles, you might as well stick to the news sites. Even as far as pure news aggregation goes there are better options than relying on whatever a handful people decide to share here.
There’s value in public commentary too. It may not be as polished as these articles but it provides a variety of perspectives, questions and criticism that might be pertinent, and for as lacking or biased as they may be, it’s much easier to tell compared to sources trying to pretend impartiality.
There’s a reason why we are here and not on, say, Feedly. This particular community only highlights it further, since it’s entirely based on the interpersonal element. Ain’t nobody looking for journalism or scientific articles on !Showerthoughts
Hey, im clearly in phase with that.
What I’ve told you I’ve seen it though.
An feminist articles attacking the male vision on a pure “male subject” like computers and that’s just a fight like you can see elsewhere.
In that case, for example, the title is enough to tilt some. I’ve seen arguments told but if the articles were read, they would have never used it 🤣🤣🤣
I don’t know if I’m clear. But I agree with you, just told you me feeling BC of you know, experience x)
100%. i’d be more interested in knowing what some guys in a bar in NYC were saying when hitler died versus reading an article about it. articles are just facts put in order. biased opinions make us human.
Thanks for sharing your opinion about it.
A great thing about Reddit is that because of its size you would sometimes get an expert in that field or even the person who wrote the paper popping up. It wasn’t crazy common but did happen a decent bit.
That is ofc balanced by it being full of complete assholes who have no idea what they’re talking about.