this post was submitted on 03 Aug 2023
70 points (78.2% liked)

No Stupid Questions

35806 readers
1543 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
ja2@lemmy.world
_MoveSwiftly@lemmy.world
Rooki@lemmy.world
Thekingoflorda@lemmy.world
automodbeta@lemmy.world
L3s@lemmy.world
70
Don't you find it disappointing that people apply Herd Mentality for upvoting top comments, even if it's not the best one out there? (feddit.de)
submitted 1 year ago by brandneworld@feddit.de to c/nostupidquestions@lemmy.world
33 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

It doesn't matter if the most upvoted comment is pro or against subject in discussion. All that matters is bolstering a comment that is minimally compatible with participant's thinking and making it win against the opposite argument (competing and most voted one).

So it seems that the most satisfactory comment (for most readers) doesn't really matter at all. What matters, before anything else, is visibility of an opinion that somewhat aligns with one's thinking, rather than writing or finding the most corresponding comment for that subject, fully compatible with reader's perception.

all 38 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] hitmyspot@lemmy.world 55 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I think it’s more that not every comment gets upvoted after there is quite a few.

Early comments get voted on by merit. Once there is a few comments that have sufficient upvotes and replies, they become their own ecosystem.

If I’m in the comments of a popular post, I might upvote the first few top level comments I see as all make a good point. The fifth might make the best point and deserve to be higher, but alas, it only gets one upvote. By the time I get to the sixth, it’s just saying the same thing differently, no upvote needed. Seventh is interesting, so upvote, but it’s getting boring now. I don’t read further comments.

Other people stop at comment 10. Others stop at 4. So the first few get magnified, the rest struggle for the same level of attention and eyeballs. But it’s not a competition. So if the discussion is good, who cares. The 10th discussion might be the best because all the people with short attention spans, like me, aren’t there.

[–] Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz 8 points 1 year ago

That’s the main issue with this system.

On Reddit you occasionally came across a post that was set up in election mode. The idea is that if you’re Youtuber or a podcast host, and you’re interested in having Q&A, but there are way too many questions, this way you can filter out all the boring questions and focus on the inserting ones. People can send a top level comment with a question, and they get to see all the other proposed questions in a random order. Then you can upvote and downvote as much as you like. Since the comments are in random order, there’s no top comment bias. However, there is still a time related bias. The first few people don’t have many comments to choose from whereas the latecomers have thousands of comments to vote.

[–] Mic_Check_One_Two@reddthat.com 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Yeah, the issue is that early upvotes compound into more upvotes via visibility. You could have the best comment in the thread, but if it’s 10 days after the post was made and nobody else sees it, it won’t get any votes.

[–] Lemmylefty@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Well yeah, that’s just kind of the nature of conversations. That’s why a witty retort made an hour later just doesn’t have the oomph as a less funny one made in the moment.

In order to facilitate conversation, comments need to function like conversations, and those things just aren’t set in stone.

What it really comes down to is, when you comment, are you here to talk to people, to listen to them, or to get votes?

[–] brandneworld@feddit.de 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

so keeping tabs on posts by quickly downvoting/upvoting (in)convenient subjects, as well as slightly steering them away from what's really being discussed, might be a pretty handy tactic for manipulating course of conversation, and also making them look like not sufficiently valuable or important to be worth one's time?

[–] bleph@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I never really did this on the bad place but if you browse new and fire off something snarky or heartfelt first it often becomes the top comment in my experience

[–] Mic_Check_One_Two@reddthat.com 2 points 1 year ago

Honestly, browsing by new is one of the fastest ways to become a recognizable power user. I actually did it for a while back on the bad place. After a while, you're able to pretty quickly determine if a post is going to take off. Then you just drop a quick witty comment, and it'll have thousands of upvotes and dozens of replies in a few hours.

[–] AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I think a good rule of thumb would be to only upvote a comment if you think it’s not only good, but that it should be higher in the thread than it currently is. Then the comments already at the top wouldn’t end up so overweighted.

[–] sp6@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Thankfully Lemmy somewhat negates this with their ranking algorithm. "Hot" is the default for comments and "active" is the default for posts, which according to the Lemmy docs, both "Counterbalance the snowballing effect of votes over time with a logarithmic scale."

Basically, if a newer comments gets some upvotes, but still has fewer upvotes than older comments, that new comment will still be shown near the top at first. Then after some time passes, the algorithm slowly shifts to sorting more by "raw" number of votes instead of taking time into account.

[–] hariette@artemis.camp 5 points 1 year ago

Neat. I wonder if it’s using the original reddit algorithm as inspo.

[–] Neato@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

For me comments tend to look the same as new. Which isn't bad compared to the oldest toppest.

[–] Mic_Check_One_Two@reddthat.com 2 points 1 year ago

The big problem I’ve seen with “Active” as the default post sort is that you occasionally get year old posts suddenly get comment-bombed when someone scrolls too far and upvotes it. Suddenly that year old post is marked as active again, so it’s in everyone’s feed. And most people don’t even bother checking time stamps before commenting, so you suddenly get a flood of comments on your year old post.

[–] Lemmylefty@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If it bothers you, why not sort by New and ignore votes?

You’re not going to avoid herd mentality when socializing within a social species. That’s just how we work. So if it bothers you, curate your experience to how you want it.

[–] hoodatninja@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sorting by new ends up creating a group that just picks winners and losers for those who don't. Hence "the knights of new" with their disingenuous framing that they were doing a public service. All they were really doing, whether they knew it or not, was picking which snowballs get to roll and which don't.

Most, if not all, have to sort by new or it just trades issues.

[–] bleph@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)
  1. Browse new
  2. First comment
  3. Collect massive Internet points
  4. ???
  5. LEMMY
[–] Metal_Zealot@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

What I like about Lemmy at the moment is that it's not completely saturated with those people vying for Top Comment for sweet epic Reddit karma.

*I'm back from months later to say GODDAMIT I WAS WRONG

[–] Epicurus0319@sopuli.xyz 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Hivemind-that-must-not-be-named users: (insert unfunny meme repeated 1000 times) Gets 69420 upvotes “eDiT: tHx 4 dA gOlD kInD sTrAnGeR!!1” “eDiT2: oMgG pLaTiNuM?! I nEvEr eXpEcTeD tHiS 2 bLoW uP!!!11!”

Another user on there: (actually helpful response) gets 2 upvotes

[–] awwwyissss@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This.

[–] Epicurus0319@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Don’t let’s reuse their stupid catchphrases

[–] awwwyissss@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

My point exactly

[–] buycurious@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think any sort of social aggregator will always have this as a challenge it wrestles with.

In my opinion, the onus of applying critical thinking when reading comments/sources lies with the reader.

When a very large upvoted comment takes places, I personally comb through some of the replies to see if anyone has sources/background that might be contradictory (and then I’ll review myself for my own opinion). It’s extra effort but I only apply this things I’m “vested” in.

[–] hoodatninja@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

sdfasfsadfasdf

[–] Speculater@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Great, now I've up voted yours!

[–] simple@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Unfortunately this is always the case with platforms that have voting in them. As soon as you get enough traction your comment/post will always be among the top (I would know, I had like 200k+ comment karma on Reddit). It's way better than the alternative though, having no votes at all would encourage spam and low effort posting and make browsing kind of miserable.

Some people long for the old days of forums where nothing was sorted and everyone had a fair chance at saying what they wanted but it always devolves into low effort posting, spam, and people fighting with trolls. 4chan is evidence of that.

[–] hoodatninja@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

it’s way better than the alternative though, having no votes at all would encourage spam and low effort posting

Upvotes only, never show the results, never show people their "karma" count. Let the thread reflect the impact.

[–] paskalivichi@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago

Herd mentality is disappointing in general and usually slows progress in society.

[–] foggy@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is why brigading is a problem.

There was a lot of it in the lemmy.world defederating from whatever they defederated from the other day thread.

[–] hoodatninja@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I don't understand why people get so angry at other instances for defederating. It's why the option exists. I fully support its usage. It's not like users are cut off from them, they can easily participate in both the defederat-or and defederat-ee's communities.

[–] blackbelt352@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

While defederation is a valid tool, it's also shouldn't be the first choice if there is friction between instances. Instance Admins should talk to each other see if the problem can be resolved through various means, if not then defederation becomes a more reasonable option.