[hellbanTHIS]

I kind of disagree, Reddit has its own problems (nation states run by warlords) but the downvote button and anonymity solves some of the “outrage for likes” stuff that plagues Twitter and Facebook. I haven’t seen the frontpage you’re talking about in years and I doubt many users do.

I really don’t know why FB and Twitter don’t add an anonymous “dislike” feature. Maybe they tried it and it caused other problems, who knows. More likely though they see that outrage increases engagement even if the toxic environment chases people away eventually.

[refraincomment]

Reddit is the only social media that falls so low as to regularly display lynchings and beatings on the front page. "JusticeServed", and other cheap justifications for violence. Reddit and Twitter the biggest dumps of the internet.

[mdoms]

> I haven’t seen the frontpage you’re talking about in years and I doubt many users do.

It's the default page for anyone who isn't logged in (most likely a majority of users, or at least a large fraction). And I'd be willing to bet at least half of logged in users only have the default subs.

[bpodgursky]

"dislike" buttons can be extremely powerful tools for enforcing groupthink.

I think you downplay how much this affects reddit. Hot-topic issues shift from 55/45 popularity splits (where the minority view is present, but usually overshadowed) to 10/0 when you net out up and downvotes. It gives a sense of single-mindedness in a community where the majority view in truth only barely edges out the others.

[wayneftw]

I think forums should let users moderate things for themselves by doing the following:

- If I dislike something, don't show me that user/subject anymore unless I choose to explore outside my bubble.

- Instead of showing me how the whole world feels about something, show me how MY group (people I've upvoted) feel about it...unless I choose to explore outside my bubble. At the very least - sort comments based on how much I will agree with them.

- Maybe extend it a few levels deep: If I liked someones comment, maybe content which that user liked is also weighted higher for me.

Essentially - just make these things work for me and not some ambiguous majority of the moment. I wish HN would do this too. I really don't care how many anonymous people liked something because they're still wrong IMO. The system is not working for me.

In the real world we've solved all these problems by not forcing everybody to listen to the whole entire world's opinions all the time. In real life, if I'm homophobic/racist/etc, I hang out with my homophobic/racist/etc friends and nobody else sees me because they're busy hanging out with their own kind.

The world is full of bubbles. I don't see why we need the Internet needs to always be the polar opposite of how real life relationships work.

Of course there should still be ways to explore outside your bubble. However, there's probably no easy money with my ideas. All the user engagement addiction comes from outraging people.

[4ggr0]

> if I'm homophobic/racist/etc, I hang out with my homophobic/racist/etc friends

Well, maybe, just maybe, we should expose these people to non-homophobic and interracial content to "brainwash" them into thinking that black or gay people might not be as bad as they think :D

[wayneftw]

Isn't that what's happening on Twitter, FB and Reddit?

I don't think it's working...

[hellbanTHIS]

They can, but I always thought that had more to do with the “warlords” chasing away everyone with a different point of view.

I think the test case is probably r/libertarian where the mods are extremely hands-off, you’ll still get the downvote hammer and it’s sometimes infuriating but it’s nothing like saying something unpopular in r/politics, which isn’t even one of the worst ones.

[Tronno]

This might be true on more civilized "niche" communities, but the split on the default front page is roughly 50/40/10% ragebait/meme/substantive content, and I use the word "substantive" very generously.