stevedidWHAT

Best take

deleted by creator

I hate comparisons like these lmao.

Let’s compare sugar amounts with two things made of sugar plus all this other stuff, why not just call a spade a spade and show it in tubs of sugar? Keep the donuts and the coffee, but display the sugar visibly

Should probably post some evidence for ease of information

I really just don’t understand why we feel the need to be pedantic on the linguistics of a list of resources someone found to be (subjectively, and inherently) “awesome”

Grumpy cat energy begone

Again, large size doesn’t necessarily equate to being washed out…

It’s covers a pretty wide range of topics hence the bigger number…

Either way, would you refuse a library because it had too many books or would you use a searching/organizational system to locate what you want

Some people are stompers, some are walkers

WHATS UP FUCKERRR

I’ve been free of Twitter, Facebook, insta, etc for years now and I promise it’s a lot more liberating.

Mood has been substantially better, sometimes you get dragged into arguments on here/Reddit too but it’s pretty unlikely to get riled up by the type of trolls you see around here given their immaturity

Seem is a perfect word - remember you have no reliable way of telling if these are legions of real people, good people, bots, etc. don’t let masses online shake you so easily! You too could be a thousand account echo chamber legion if you wanted to.

That’s how these people propagandize and brainwash societies by making use of a social mechanism we have which relies on power in numbers

But the reality is that both could still see either, either way is content visibility that interesting? When the whole of the internet is just an echo chamber for information that someone off the internet found, it’s only going to get muddied down.

If we’re talking about generative content that’s not cut and dry, that too can be replicated or tweaked to produce something of equal or greater value to some extent.

Idk, overall I don’t think we should allow people who abuse their users and their data into our system more than the public already has access to.

Ultimately no special treatment should be given to them.

I think that’s a bit too pessimistic also, it’s quite common for man to use quantifiable means to assign value, seems like a no brainer statement but…

If we put our “value” on things that are countable rather than their utility then it’s no wonder we’re left with quantity over quality.

25 counts of votes is no different from having 25 soldiers in your army. It doesn’t actually reflect qualitative value, only quantitative value.

Idk man it’s a tough problem. When we make judgments of something, it seems like we must condemn the others or put them in a placement that is inferior to others which makes it inherently vulnerable to inaccuracies, bias, etc.

Are we better off filtering the chaos as it comes in or searching for what we want within it?

While I agree with the idea of everyone getting the opportunity to be heard and form an opinion, I disagree with your rationale.

relevance to a conversation is a subjective and decided on the fly depending upon how much you know about a subject you or how well you understood what someone was saying.

How someone communicates is defined even more subjectively with more unique flare, accents, lingo, etc which can further obfuscate intended meaning.

Etc etc. idk why we’re trying to categorize and make point systems for fucking everything. I would much rather have a comment section with a sort by controversial button to see where the most “debate” is going on rather than trying to prioritize one comment over another. The bulk of the post is the information, the comments are for communication and discussion and shouldn’t be taken as factual or anything other than subjective anyway.