this post was submitted on 16 Dec 2023
54 points (93.5% liked)

No Stupid Questions

35806 readers
1526 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

It's a way of denying service without officially denying service. If that sheds any light.

all 24 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ramble81@lemm.ee 36 points 11 months ago

High barrier to entry?

[–] breakingcups@lemmy.world 25 points 11 months ago (1 children)

It could be called a dark pattern?

[–] cameron_vale@lemm.ee 9 points 11 months ago

Ya, it would probably be a type of dark pattern.

[–] digger@lemmy.ca 11 points 11 months ago

Voter Suppression.

[–] cameron_vale@lemm.ee 11 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I just heard the term "administrative burden". But that's pretty vague.

[–] PrinceWith999Enemies@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

I actually think that’s not a bad phrase at all depending on the context. I wouldn’t use it if it’s about signing up for a commercial website account unless you’re a consultant, but if you’re talking about signing up for government services, I think it’s perfect.

Governments know that administrative burdens increase participation costs. Government agencies and administrators that are trying to reduce utilization of a program without going through the burden or optics of changing a law will make every effort to make it harder to get. Imagine if you could sign up for SNAP, welfare, healthcare, and register to vote with one click. I think we’d find program utilization would soar.

What if someone undeserving takes advantage of the system? Well, that’s why universal programs can be more efficient. There’s no qualifying for a program because it’s universal. Remove tuition from public colleges and universities - you’ve eliminated the administrative burden of navigating aid programs and scholarships and opened up higher education.

Definitely not the worst phrase.

[–] XiELEd@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago

Barrier of Bureaucracy

[–] PeepinGoodArgs@reddthat.com 7 points 11 months ago (1 children)
[–] Potatos_are_not_friends@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Makes me think of that joke where you need to fill out three different forms on the third floor to get in line to fill out the one real form.

[–] RyruGrr@lemmy.world -1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Ron Swanson smirks at your comment.

[–] PlutoniumAcid@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

Rowan Atkinson, too.

[–] sibannac@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

Gate keeping

[–] subspaceinterferents@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

Positive denial.

[–] Nemo@midwest.social 3 points 11 months ago

Attention tax

[–] guyrocket@kbin.social 3 points 11 months ago

Setting the bar too high.

Barriers to entry.

Setting the bar to entry too high.

Setting the barriers to entry too high.

Setting too high the bar-barriers to entry.

Setting too high the barbarians to entry.

Setting too high the barbarians to entropy.

Setting the entropy barbarians too high.

[–] AlgeriaWorblebot@lemmy.nz 2 points 11 months ago
[–] MolochAlter@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

Dictatorship by red tape

[–] son_named_bort@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

Reverse Comcast

[–] GreatAlbatross@feddit.uk 1 points 11 months ago

The UK benefits system.

[–] sour@kbin.social 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

is question related to specific development or no

[–] cameron_vale@lemm.ee 8 points 11 months ago (2 children)

In my state, getting certain government benefits, over the past decade, was a matter of five minutes on the phone with an official.

As of this year it's a scary maze of a paper application. The online application process is "temporarily out of service". Conversation with a relevant official is no longer offered. And while you were trying to make sense of all that we stopped your benefits.

What we're seeing here is a way to stop providing benefits, but without the legislative hassles.

[–] otter@lemmy.ca 1 points 11 months ago

I can't think of a specific term, but it might be summed up as "reducing access and adding unnecessary barriers to discourage the use of benefits"?

Adding enough friction to the process that people are more likely to give up during the process. It's something that can be countered with non profits that exist to help guide people through the process

[–] sour@kbin.social 0 points 11 months ago