545

He's coming right out and saying it. What more do people need? You'll be safe if you're a white, cishet, Christian man. Anyone else who helps this guy into office could be potentially signing their own death warrant and he's coming right out and admitting it. Promoting it.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] superduperenigma@lemmy.world 31 points 8 months ago

The post body is for whatever the community rules say the post body is for. They have an opinion on what rules this community should adopt regarding post bodies, and I think it's fair that they can voice that opinion. It has nothing to do with whether or not this is Reddit, they just used an example from Reddit.

[-] blanketswithsmallpox@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Agreed. And not including post body information beyond anything except the article has always been a strictly reddit based thing.

This is Lemmy and Federated so I'm against that hard.

There really should be no point in having to post a second comment rather than OP utilizing the space already built into post submissions either to save comment space/bandwith or prime discussion.

I see no real need why they need to be separated. The difference is negligible to my browsing experience. It does end up making OP need to do one more post though.

If we didn't want OP to have an opinion on something posted, then what's the difference between simply not letting them comment then? Is there some psychological trick that's make their words at the top of the page more credible just because they posted a bogus or trusted source? Does that distinction really need to be made or are users just not used to it due to reddiquette?

I think it's the latter, and antiquated.

[-] superduperenigma@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago

And not including post body information beyond anything except the article has always been a strictly reddit based thing.

This is Lemmy and Federated so I'm against that hard.

The entire point of the fediverse and Lemmy is that different instances and the communities within them can set things up as they see fit. And I think being so militantly against something simply because people on Reddit did it that way is silly. There's no reason to dismiss an idea simply because it was done that way on Reddit before. Just let Lemmy be its own thing without worrying about how Reddit does or doesn't do things.

I see no real need why they need to be separated. The difference is negligible to my browsing experience. It does end up making OP need to do one more post though.

The suggestion is based on the opinion that the content of posts on this community should be limited to objective information directly from/about what is being posted. Opinions, discussions, arguments, etc have their place in comments section, that way people can respond to those individual comments. Having the post itself be a combination of an article and a random musing from the OP means top level comments will be a mish-mash of responses to the article and responses to the OP's post body comment. By requiring the OP to post their comments in the comments section, we ensure that all top-level comments are responses to the linked article itself.

If we didn't want OP to have an opinion on something posted, then what's the difference between simply not letting them comment then?

Nobody is saying they don't want OP to have an opinion or be able to comment, it's a simple suggestion to separate the OP's comments from the post body itself.

[-] blanketswithsmallpox@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Right, so you've already agreed on the first two points.

I see some merit to the limiting top level comments to the article nobody reads anyway..., but expecting everyone to either go on a hate or love it comment parade feels like something that would naturally happen in the comments anyway.

I'd err to the side of already giving comments free fodder for discussion just to boost engagement. OP is essentially preempting what's already going to be a comment anyway. Hence my emphasis on is there some sort of social trick that leads credence to it? Or is that simply a failure on the readers part. It's the latter to me.

You're also expecting that multiple of the same comments at top level aren't already a thing lol. Or that OP isn't going to bring their argument to multiple levels anyway, which they will if they're active on their posts and not just top level spamming.

this post was submitted on 05 Dec 2023
545 points (94.6% liked)

politics

18601 readers
4062 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS