Honestly, I’m tired of discussions of Lemmy from outside the Lemmy community. It’s always the same stuff: “blah blah slur filter so use Lenny, blah blah against free speech, blah blah full of leftists and not centrists like me, blah blah admins are anti-diversity.” For as much as HN complains about Reddit sometimes, these HN comments essentially mirror Reddit comments about Lemmy.
All these topics have been done to death at this point, but it’s even worse when it’s clear that some of these people aren’t even a part of the community and yet there they are criticizing it in the same way everyone else has already.
It would just be nice to see discussions and criticisms of Lemmy from other angles. Something like talking about its place in the current iteration of the Web, or about its UX, or even its community, but from an non-reactionary angle. To me, Lemmy is an experiment, a social one that’s currently seeing how communities form and change through federation, moderation, and community feedback. It’s not perfect, but dismissing it as a project and experiment just because of something as simple as a slur filter is reductive and ridiculous, to be quite honestly.
Ultimately, though, I’m not obligated to read what these people write, and they’re not obligated to write how I want, so my complaints are useless, unproductive, and mostly me being defensive because of criticism thrown toward a community that I’m a part of. Still, though, it would just be nice to have something more refreshing.
I’m not sure you’ll find productive discussions about Lemmy outside of the fediverse. Understanding the paradigm sort of requires one to use it to really see how it works. And the idea of federating in and of itself connotes a certain style of politics.
Successful fedi sites are heavy on personal responsibility to your community and active discussion with people you regularly interact with. On web 2.0 sites you are incentivised to interact with content creators and power users. The average reddit/youtube/etc user barely ever interacts with people that they know nor feel any responsibility toward them. Imo, this is why the fedi has been particularly attractive to anarchists.
Maybe the website needs to have some sort of FAQ, something like the wayland faq, Wayland was another “controversial” tech which had a lot of critics some of them having poorly based criticism but all the advocacy and seeing it mature probably made a difference and now i don’t really see it criticized .
Honestly, I’m tired of discussions of Lemmy from outside the Lemmy community. It’s always the same stuff: “blah blah slur filter so use Lenny, blah blah against free speech, blah blah full of leftists and not centrists like me, blah blah admins are anti-diversity.” For as much as HN complains about Reddit sometimes, these HN comments essentially mirror Reddit comments about Lemmy.
All these topics have been done to death at this point, but it’s even worse when it’s clear that some of these people aren’t even a part of the community and yet there they are criticizing it in the same way everyone else has already.
It would just be nice to see discussions and criticisms of Lemmy from other angles. Something like talking about its place in the current iteration of the Web, or about its UX, or even its community, but from an non-reactionary angle. To me, Lemmy is an experiment, a social one that’s currently seeing how communities form and change through federation, moderation, and community feedback. It’s not perfect, but dismissing it as a project and experiment just because of something as simple as a slur filter is reductive and ridiculous, to be quite honestly.
Ultimately, though, I’m not obligated to read what these people write, and they’re not obligated to write how I want, so my complaints are useless, unproductive, and mostly me being defensive because of criticism thrown toward a community that I’m a part of. Still, though, it would just be nice to have something more refreshing.
I’m not sure you’ll find productive discussions about Lemmy outside of the fediverse. Understanding the paradigm sort of requires one to use it to really see how it works. And the idea of federating in and of itself connotes a certain style of politics.
Successful fedi sites are heavy on personal responsibility to your community and active discussion with people you regularly interact with. On web 2.0 sites you are incentivised to interact with content creators and power users. The average reddit/youtube/etc user barely ever interacts with people that they know nor feel any responsibility toward them. Imo, this is why the fedi has been particularly attractive to anarchists.
Maybe the website needs to have some sort of FAQ, something like the wayland faq, Wayland was another “controversial” tech which had a lot of critics some of them having poorly based criticism but all the advocacy and seeing it mature probably made a difference and now i don’t really see it criticized .