No need to apologize, my friend. Here's some timestamped links of the giant numbers leading the way:

https://youtu.be/vS-w8By9G88?t=7286

https://youtu.be/vS-w8By9G88?t=7646

https://youtu.be/vS-w8By9G88?t=7655

https://youtu.be/vS-w8By9G88?t=7692

https://youtu.be/vS-w8By9G88?t=7752

This level is just full of them, all those are for the same level... The timestamps are right on the spot, so might be helpful to pause or the player will probably just run past them quickly.

Not sure what happens on kbin when linking multiple YT vids in a single post. Let's find out!

Selaco isn't released yet so keep that #1 spot open (https://store.steampowered.com/app/1592280/Selaco/) 🤞

Not saying it's fine, just that stupid questions deserve stupid answers.

Many countries have private prisons.

I've been pondering the concept of Reddit "karma," and I believe it's time for a serious discussion about its true nature and the impact it has on our communities. I've written multiple posts about this previously here on kbin (https://kbin.social/m/RedditMigration/t/95140/Dearest-developers-Stop-reinventing-the-wheel) with very mixed results in the engagement. Though I am still working on refining the argument.

While the idea behind karma is to provide users with a reputation score or social credit, I've noticed that it doesn't necessarily align with those intentions. Instead, it often serves as a reinforcement for users to stay within their comfort zones and echo chambers, stifling diverse perspectives and constructive dialogue.

One of the main issues I've observed is the tendency for downvoting to occur when a user expresses an opinion that goes against the prevailing sentiment within a particular community. Even if the opinion is well-thought-out, respectful, and contributes to meaningful conversations, it becomes a target for downvotes. This behavior discourages users from engaging or expressing differing viewpoints.

It's disheartening to witness how users can manipulate the system out of spite. Some individuals go as far as visiting other users' profiles and downvoting their past posts to deliberately lower their karma score. This kind of behavior further emphasizes how the current karma system is more of a reflection of how often a user participates in echo chambers that align with their views, rather than an accurate measure of their quality engagement or contribution to the community.

With that in mind, I propose that we reconsider the name of the point system to better reflect its actual usage. Here are a few alternative names that encapsulate the behavior we often see:

• Echo Chamber Score: Highlighting the tendency to reward users who stick to echo chambers and discourage exploration of different perspectives.

• Bias Points: The system measures a user's inclination to conform to specific biases or ideological groups.

• Conformity Score: The score reflects a user's adherence to the prevailing opinions within specific communities, rather than their engagement.

I believe a change in the name would serve as a wake-up call for the community, highlighting the importance of open-mindedness and respectful discourse. It would encourage users to think beyond their echo chambers and engage in meaningful conversations, even if they hold different opinions.

I've previously discussed how it would be more beneficial to leave the rep system in place, but keep the scores hidden to everyone besides the user of that profile. Another thing to think about is the way Steam has a rep system regarding VAC Bans. Instead of banning a profile completely, just some big red text on their profile noting which game or community there were banned from and how often.

I'm eager to hear your thoughts on this matter. What are your suggestions for improving the system to foster more open and constructive dialogue?

I deleted 9 years worth of user content, across 5 different reddit accounts. Followed by CCPA "Delete My Data" demands, on each account.

It's almost as if, a large majority of reddit users are spineless, or consider their useless internet clout points more valuable than a small sense of morality...

A temporary blackout is not a protest compared to this method.

For those wondering... TamperMonkey browser add-on with RedditHistorySanitizer userscript (https://greasyfork.org/en/scripts/23605-reddit-history-sanitizer/code). It's kinda slow, but much faster than doing it manually!

what buttons does the user see?

Voting options could still exist, the point is that the metrics are hidden (when it's something as simple as Up or Down). You wouldn't see how many people agree or disagree with a post or the content the've decided to post. Discouraging the countless accounts who repost the same memes to the same communities multiples times per week.

I'm mostly going to just hit any or all of them when I like the content. And I'll click none of them when I dislike content

Ideally, there would be multiple options (engaging, comprehensive, shitpost, etc) but a user would only be allowed to select one, and wouldn't be able to submit it without reaching a specific character limit explaining their position. Albeit, some would just fill the character limit with emojis, no doubt. In turn, the hope is that the community would call out such behaviors because, admittedly...

I don't think the internet can be objective enough to make these reliably more useful than an upvote

...I might be naive and have more faith in people...

Should this thread's quality be treated differently based on my format?

The simplest answer is that it would be unlikely that a single user would be able to heavily influence that metric. More heavily weighing the amount of the engaged users.

but I don't think we should aspire to black box algorithms

I most assuredly agree. "Security through obscurity" has never been the correct answer. That's why we have open discussions, so more than just a few people can find the vulnerabilities. ;)

I'm trusting based on your writing that you're open to collective constructive criticism.

That's exactly why I'm here. I've never enjoyed most social media platforms, so when I heard people were migrating, I had to check it out. Come to find out, all these alternate, open platforms are just recreating the same disaster. Taking the, in my opinion, worst aspects of social platforms and trying to justify their continued usage...

Humans have spent a heck of a lot of time, money and effort trying to figure about it, and we still seem to get it wrong a lot haha.

Name one time when money has created something better than that which was created by a heartfelt, open source, community (don't actually LOL).

Again, I appreciate your input. It's why I'm here, to talk to people who actually care and want something better. How can we say we're moving forward and progressing when we're actually just revolving?

I agree with everything you've said in this thread. I submit that, not only should the voting system be anonymous, the results should be hidden from everyone, besides the user who is viewing their own account information or usage history.

By keeping the voting system anonymous, we avoid the possibility of blind conformity to the masses and facilitate a more free and safe community. With the aim of encouraging critical thinking and discouraging jumping to conclusions.

I can't tell if you are agreeing or disagreeing. However...

Thank you for sharing your perspective on the matter. I understand and appreciate your viewpoint regarding the implementation of these tools. It's true that such tools can play a role in addressing and mitigating the spread of, what I would consider "useless content".

Upon reflecting on your comment, I also recognize that my own experiences and interactions within certain communities might contribute to my perception of the issue. It's possible that I have been engaging with communities that fundamentally do not align with my own values, thus cultivating my thoughts into this matter.

While there are valid reasons to consider the impact of limiting certain content, I also believe it's important to strike a balance and foster an environment that promotes open dialogue and critical thinking. We should encourage users to engage with different viewpoints and facilitate discussions that allow for the exploration of wisdom.

I believe we both agree that by engaging in constructive discussions, users can collectively work towards improving understanding, challenging misinformation, and ultimately fostering wiser and more informed conversations. Regardless of if those means are through memes or long form, discussion type content.

Thank you again for sharing your thoughts. I look forward to hearing any future input you have on the topic.

This is another great feature that I will add to my list of suggestions. Thank you. You are absolutely right in that "Post Has Been Answered" feature is absolutely necessary for these types of platforms. Ironically enough, your comment has the most downvotes while being the correct answer to the problem.

I'm by no means asking for immediate action or implementation. just attempting to provoke discussion and thought into the topic. I both understand and appreciate what is already happening here and the level of effort it would take to redesign and roll out global changes.

we can't actually prevent all fear of judgement or backlash

Of course not, it would be foolish to think otherwise. This is the internet, hatred and controversy will always exist. However, you can lead a horse to water...

which can be very strong disagreement while staying within normal moderation limits.

In my mind, this is the preferred interaction. Users should always be able to see all perspectives within a discussion. It makes one think more about the content they are consuming, offers more context for the lurkers, and it's very simple for any user to block or hide any other user from future interactions (if that's what they feel is needed).

I propose making downvotes have no effect on reputation.

I didn't address my perspective regarding rep or karma, but I should have. This goes back to my previous point and another topic I didn't touch on, moderation. I agree with both proposals. A better system for troll-free magazines or online spaces MIGHT be as simple as looking at how many users have blocked a specific account. Though, it's likely to be more nuanced than this considering how passionate some people are certain issues.

a little upvote feels like the correct way to say "Nice!" vs no response and letting the author think they aren't being seen.

I was never much of a social media user, however, I think one thing that reddit did right was the awards. Unfortunately, the moderators likely didn't see any of that income (something to keep in mind considering the budding state of alt social platforms). Point being, I think something like that is much more rewarding than an upvote, while a conversation outweighs both.

vote counts have benefits for me, letting me feel the pulse of community response, and I'm idealistic about finding a healthy medium!

I'd argue that it isn't healthy at all. But this circles back to the clout chasing argument. I think healthy discussion is going to give a user more than an arrow can ever give, while also promoting critical thinking and the development of more substantial connections among users and the community.

Thank your for taking the time.

You've pooped 3x today? No, you've been backed up for 3 days? No... Maybe, you just wanted to help prove my point... Either way, thank you for the interaction.