Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Please don't post about US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
If the question is open, e.g. "do you like apples?" and the question is in my area of interest, I usually give an answer. But if the question assumes an answer or is deliberately polarizing, e.g. "why don't you like apples?" I pass.
You know who else liked apples? Hitler. Coincidence? No.
Coincidence? No.
Of course it’s not a coincidence. Everyone likes apples. If you disagree it obviously means you’re lying because everyone likes apples.
Everyone is Hitler?
That’s a great point! Not what I was driving at but the logic makes sense to me…
In the middle of my third paragraph I deleted most of this comment and reminded myself, my perspective is not needed.
I've long stopped engaging in long political debates. Namely because every time, someone is debating you for the sole purpose of winning the argument. There isn't a lot of lee way made to admit fault or see the flaws of any arguments including their own. It just turns into a pointless debate that has no end.
Religion is the same.
It is hard sometimes to talk about the flaws about LGBTQ communities without being branded. There are flaws that I've seen with it and I know they're there and continue to be there. But nobody wants to admit it and hear it, so they just go straight to labeling.
All that anyone ever wants to hear anymore is just a validated response that confirms their opinion. Because people long forgot that opinions are opinions and not any scientific source.
Religion.
Holy crap are do people on Lemmy seem to have a seething hate for them all. Not interested with debating over something we’ll disagree on. It’s just not a welcome topic here.
I think most of us are tired of the vocal minority that exist IRL that are actively harming others (especially lgbtq+, women, and minorities) and the silent majority that are complicit with it, especially in the US.
Religion also seems to have a hatred of every other belief, explicit or implicit, e.g. if you don't believe in Jesus, you deserve to be tortured eternally. Why would I be tolerant of people that think that's capital g Good?
Plus, how can you have a debate when one side won't keep to the basic rules of evidence.
One last thing you might notice is that it's probably not Buddhism or Daoism that get hostile reactions. That might be worth inspecting.
See, I think this is what they're talking about though. I hate Christianity. I was raised Protestant and because of other factors in my life, Christianity effectively ruined large swathes of my lifespan. It's still an active threat to me, and likely will be for my entire life. I'm likely to be a fairly stringent atheist forever.
All that said, edgy internet atheists are one of the most annoying archetypes to run into online. If even a whiff of a religious topic comes up, they pounce and nip and bark. They satisfy almost every stereotype the religious people have of them because they often seem to delight in the cruelty of knocking on beliefs. Like, my whole top comment still being relevant, religion has a reason to exist. It gives people feelings of hope, love, and belonging. Anyone who has experienced a lack of those can understand why people fall into religion and why it's like any other addiction.
I'm breaking one of my rules right now, talking about religion on social media, but I figured the "meta" aspect of this thread would make it productive. I hope I don't regret it.
Yes. Especially Lemmy. People here love turning a discussion into an argument on shit they don't know much about. Subsequently some of the most brazen and obvious strawmanning, wild out of field assumptions, and gaslighting I've seen online—usually with a lot of not reading full comments or disregarding context or 90% of the comment in general. You can constantly call them out on it and try to direct discourse back onto topic instead, but it's almost always futile. For them, it was only ever a competition of feeling superiority of some kind.
I've never seen anything quite like it online. Reddit was mild in comparison.
So glad to see that others are noticing this too... The hive mind effect also feels even stronger than it used to on Reddit, probably because the audience here is less diverse.
Without knowing the data, I'm pretty sure I'm politically and ideologically quite aligned with much of Lemmy's overall user base. Still, often when I point out misinformation or misconceptions even if they "don't fit the narrative" of what I broadly believe, I get downvoted without anyone even responding with a counter argument. It's extra frustrating because I know I probably agree with the opinions of those people downvoting me, it's just that I believe there's more nuance to many topics that I would like to discuss, but unfortunately the Lemmy audience acts as if everything is a black & white situation.
This. I am a leftist, but not the kind who thinks Lenin's self serving ideas translate very well into the modern world. Which in Lemmy terms, apparently makes me a fascist.
More recently I seem to just be a marked man anywhere on .ml, after questioning some seriously petty moderating decisions.
Lemmy is honestly a pretty awful intersection of censorship and extremism. Reddit is shit because of the monetization push, but Lemmy is honestly far worse when it comes to just normal discussion being randomly removed for stepping outside a very particular orthodoxy.
As admitted by some, Lemmy is a haven for outcasts who are insecure and in need of some sort of validation. They're clingy about the things that provide it and touchy about things that threatens it, thus projecting an intensity in their interactions.
I see it as coping with helplessly living within an unfair reality. We need more zen in our lives.
Yep, I have written huge comments on my phone, only to hit cancel when I realize that I don't have the energy to deal with it.
my new year’s resolution this year was stop wasting time replying to dumbasses online
it’s not going very well but it’s the thought that counts. we’ll get em next year
In my industry, people can get very toxic really quickly over minor details. I've decided quite a few times to just let things go, even if they are blatantly wrong.
You end up in a situation where the person on the other end really just does not want to drop it, has to "win" no matter what. Even if the subject in itself was something you went to school learning/writing a paper on.
The people that need to "win" drive me crazy. It's not enough to them if you concede on some points, it's not enough if you agree to disagree, they just have to be right 100%, and you realize they won't be happy unless you say "Sorry, I was wrong and you were right." and bow to their superior intelligence.
I've made the mistake of engaging with people like this before and it was a nightmare. Like you said, they wouldn't just drop it, even after I explicitly said "Sorry, but we are going in circles here, we should just end it." after an hour long discussion, where they could've easily taken their "W" from me walking away.
What you’re doing isn’t a bad thing. I went through something similar.
Your mental health is more important than any online discussion could ever be. If that means less food for the trolls and sealions, so be it.
Usually in online arguments I don't expect to convince the person I'm arguing with, but to show anyone else reading the thread that an opposing opinion exists. But that said, sometimes I simply don't engage if I don't have the energy.
I do appreciate posts like those.
My objective when I look through a comment thread, especially in a topic I don't know much about, I'm looking for the well reasoned posts. I admit I'm a human (confirmed via captchas) and love to have my opinions validated, but I also like to read a different take on a situation or issue. And because I am not in a situation where I don't feel like I have to defend my opinion I'm more open to seeing a different perspective.
So thank you for taking the time to write those out - and to others that do that thank you as well.
I’m a massive Doctor Who fan and discourse surrounding it has been ‘difficult’ for the last few years. As the quality of the show has varied, some fans have denounced more recent series, and others have become angry that they don’t enjoy the same things as they do. At the end of the day we’re all fans of Doctor Who, we just can’t agree what Doctor Who is, but I think we should accept that and all let each other enjoy the Doctor Who we want to.
I won't discuss politics, and I won't share personal info about myself in general
Yeah sometimes I have what might be decent input on a topic but it would then start painting a picture of my profession, so I don't. That also goes for some questions that I have which I could use help with, but are specific enough that I don't post them. It's likely that it doesn't matter; but the whole "the Internet doesn't forget" piece is something to be a little careful about, unfortunately
Yes.
Absolutely. Not even just online, but IRL too.
I'm a software engineer that works on tech that's extremely contentious in public discourse. Most people have pretty negative assumptions about myself and my work to the point that I hate talking about it. Even most people in my industry can be a bit insufferable. So I'd rather just keep my mouth shut and keep doing my own thing.
Yeah. I figure there's little to no point trying to engage with people online anout topics I feel strongly about. And I mean anything. Like I quit trying to convince people Mike V is actually a worthless skateboarder and king of the kooks, all the way down to the Sex Pistols are a boy band. Not to mention actually important topics like healthcare and reproductive rights. Though, I've quit doing it irl too. I think if anyone I talk to can be convinced to change their mind after talking to me, they're just going to change their mind next time someone else tries. I find it's better to just be the person I want more people to be and live by example. It's the same thing I tell my kids- strive to be the person you want as a friend.
But I also tell my kids no one is allowed to play guns and roses in my house, so come to your own conclusions.
I think meal prepping sucks donkey balls and most food that is meal prepped tastes like crap after its sat in the fridge/freezer. I have been personally attacked on more than one occasion for bringing this up so I just don't anymore.
I made this same decision for myself explicitly just a few days ago. It's just bad for my mental health to constantly be arguing with people online, especially with how easily online discussions turn sour in tone. It's so incredibly rare to have an actual fulfilling discussion where both sides are open to having their minds changed, and thus there's really no point to it.
Lemmy has some awful communities (no names), that are heavily skewed in one political view, and discussing anything other than their "absolute facts" or agreeing with the group gets you heavily downvoted and insulted.
It's not a friendly place at times.
After leaving Kbin (for unrelated reasons), where those spaces are blocked by default, I started to wonder if I should leave Lemmy, then realized it was not all that way but only certain spaces, easily blocked ever since 0.19.3. (Reddit had become virtually all that way, so it was making sense to me to think that social media was just becoming that way in general.)
However, saying the names of those spaces out loud is likely to trigger removal by a mod.
This is a real problem for wanting the Fediverse to grow in the future, as unsuspecting new people see that and - the sane ones anyway - don't want any part of it. Every one of us, unless we were warned, learned the hard way about "those places". By ignoring the issues, e.g. by leaving it up to each individual user to block those instances, we allow this situation to perpetuate. I for one think it would be far friendlier to block any instance where there is a >75% chance that a new user would be not merely downvoted but outright insulted and make such communities opt-in rather than the current situation of needing to first detect which ones are that way and then opt-out of each one individually.
IDF and Hamas in the context of warfare.
I just have an interest in modern conflicts, but there's usually a humanitarian crisis that I don't want to overshadow and or discredit.
Most people here (afaik) aren't part of combat communities so there's no point talking about strategy or objectives unless it has an impact on the broader issue.
Some topics are way too depressing for me to talk about.
Yes, I do. Sometimes I disagree with something but I know my opinion will not be appreciated and I will be called names for just a different opinion. Often, it's not that I out those opinions in public but I just think them to myself but let other people be as they are. But that nuance will not come across online.
I tend to avoid certain taboo topics because I assume some day all my social media posts will be linked back to me and I don't have faith in people being capable of understanding all the nuance in what I'm saying and it'll just make it seem like I'm saying something I'm not.
I also don't discuss drugs because they're illegal and I don't do drugs and neither should you and even if you do you're better off shutting the fuck up about it.
Yes and I’ve largely opted out of the same conversations irl too, for my own mental health I have to check out of certain conversations
Information is competition if it can change the world. Information is informative if it is widely known and simply repeated. Choose what innovative thoughts you share carefully. They spread timelessly to open minds once they’re out.
I do it because I don't really mind a shit show, but I 100% understand those who want to remain out of it. Lemmy is insanely toxic at times and it's sometimes made me reconsider this platform.
Gender-related stuff is usually good to stay away from if you have anything even slightly critical to say about women and don’t phrase it correctly (such that women can’t be blamed for it). Saying positive/negative stuff is fine for men, bonus points if you bring up how nobody cares about them. Go ahead and downvote me, prove me right.