[pjc50]

I think it's an exaggeration of the "city effect": the denser an environment is, the more likely it is that people who see you out to talk to you are going to have a negative agenda, because everyone else is trying to keep their head down.

If you meet a stranger at the North Pole, where you're the only two humans around, you're going to talk to them. If you meet a stranger in a remote village, you're probably going to talk to them. If you meet a stranger on the street in New York, you're probably going to put your hand over your wallet. Adverse selection wins.

It sometimes feels like social media has gone from a place to make friends to a place to make enemies - or at least to bond with a group through the medium of hate. Bonding through hate of the outsider is hardly new, but it's especially negative on the Internet where it can be amplified over and over.

[card_zero]

What if you meet them in a remote corner of an unpopular online RPG?

[tzumaoli]

It reminds me of this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FIFty-O4rOE TLDR: amazing things can happen, and people are actually nice in this kind of environment!

[korse]

Is pvp enabled?

[GoatInGrey]

I must invite them to duel. Vampire rules.

[sentinelsignal]

Oh yeah ive never heard of this city effect but it does make sense. And to your other point i do see a lot of bonding over hate or negativity and i wouldn't blame that on social media. Just people being irrational and irresponsible.

[pastage]

The idea of the city effect is suburbia romatization. My view is that people (me included) tend to be biased in what they like. I love cities and dense areas and hence most interactions I have are positive.

I like what you said about the kinship through hate, I feel no connection to a city though rather I see the segregation of suburbia as the breeding ground for hate.

[pjc50]

Most interactions in a city are neutral: you can walk past a thousand people in a subway without conceiving of it as an interaction, you just ignore them and they ignore you. In a way you couldn't do it you met in a wilderness.

[pastage]

That is a bold statement I do not understand why you think it is true.

I am trying to understand how your concept about a common hate connects to cities. You are comparing leisure time "the wilderness" to work time "the big city". A city lets you choose your interactions, and it forces you to see things that are not only the hate in your bubble. The possibility to have an interaction that changes your world view is greater in an integrated city.

Hate can grow even if we all sit in a corner of the woods on the internet, or if we listen to the same radio host.

There are too many cultural aspects in your view of the city, I do not know where you come from here. FWIW I have lived in mega cities, and also for years outside of cities in some of the least populated spaces in the "developed world". My experience do not reflect yours at all.

[johnnyanmac]

>I do not understand why you think it is true.

You're simply not going to have time to speak to everyone in a subway to fish out that positive interaction, even if you wanted to.

I don't think most interactions will be hateful, but if the odds are .1%, you have some 50/50 shot of a bad interaction with 1000 people. It's just statistics.

[ChrisMarshallNY]

> where it can be amplified over and over

Especially if a corporation that controls the venue, deliberately amplifies the rancor.