This is a theory that’s previously been stated in log/39-normie-hypothesis.gmi, but I think it’s worth expanding on as it’s become very relevant with the recent Reddit shit-show actualizing just how bad that website has gotten along with social media in general. I think the model demonstrate how the ’enshittification’ process is an inevitability with any social media that is run on a venture capital model. An online community can be like a village, where you have familiar faces, collective experiences, shared values and so forth.

Great writing on the current Reddit saga. The author put down in words a lot of things in my mind I couldn’t find the right words.

  • RandomBit@sh.itjust.works
    4·
    1 year ago

    Personally, I found that karma led to self-censorship of any idea that remotely deviated from the group consensus.

    • manitcor@lemmy.intai.tech
      2·
      1 year ago

      Ofc! whats the point of posting anything when you have people actively work to suppress your thoughts and statements?

      Really user-based meta-moderation had been pretty much a disaster, not sure we need internet points at all, things worked great without them.

    • honeyed_coffee@sopuli.xyz
      1·
      1 year ago

      Can you think of alternatives to voting, though? Sorting always requires some curating system that isn’t random but I can’t think of any that would be robust to group consensus

      • RandomBit@sh.itjust.works
        3·
        1 year ago

        I don’t think user voting in of itself is a problem. It’s the consequences of large negative voting that causes the real problems. In Reddit, a single unpopular comment on a popular subreddit could send a casual Redditor into negative karma which effectively shadowbans them from Reddit. As a result, you see people deleting their comments to stop the bleeding. Controversial opinions are punished severely.