Old habits die hard, but there’s Reddiquette which needs to be revived, and some which needs to die.
Many “golden-age” redditors remember a time when downvoting was reserved for hostility, not a different opinion. For the sake of our growing community I would like to implore everyone to be awesome to each other.
However, this place is not Reddit.
- We don’t measure in bananas here.
- We don’t need to append “edit: typo” to edited posts and comments.
- if you see something which is worthy of a downvote: down vote and move on! Don’t engage with it and feed the algorithm/engament machine so other people are exposed to it when sorting by active.
Showing the reason you edit a post isn’t dumb, its to give a valid reason so people don’t think you edited to make someones response look bad. Saying its for context, adding a word or whatever just shows you didn’t edit it maliciously.
The whole “edit: thanks for gold and I can’t believe my most upvoted comment was about editing!” can go away for sure though
Holy shit agreed. The “thanks for le kind gold stranger” shit makes me want to fucking cut my throat. Some shit im begging to stay on leddit. All the shit on /r/circlejerk for example.
Edit: le thanks for the gold kind stranger
This argument never really made sense to me. Anyone who is being deceptive is not going to tell people they’re editing their comments.
It’s the result of nothing more than a moral panic. There aren’t roving bands of keyboard warriors rolling around making comments and then editing them to make others look stupid.
And even if there were, they could just include “edit: typo” and get away with it. Unless someone takes screenshots.
I think it says more about the community that everyone is expected to prove their innocence. Let’s have a little faith in each other, we’re better than that.
It makes sense to me and I’ve been editing comments this way since the early 2000’s. For some, it’s a cultural practice that’s probably decades old.
If the platform didn’t state the comment was edited, I probably wouldn’t bother but if it does, there is always a thought at the back of the reader’s mind about what happened. Leaving a note about editing negates the thought. Leaving pointless edits less so.
I find it more ethical and transparent, particularly in discussion threads where debates are being held.
I get it as a cultural thing, but it makes no sense epistemologically.
An unethical person would not state they changed their comment, and a malicious person would state their edit was mundane. Those two factors alone render the practice of proving your innocence in advance moot.
I think it’s sad that people reflexively assume the worst. I used to engage in some heated debates on Reddit, but I was never accused of, or assumed the other person edited their posts to make me look bad. It seems like paranoid behaviour to me.
Strangely enough, if it became the norm to correct typos without stating it, the default assumption would be that the edit was a typo correction.
Listen, I’ll measure with a fucking banana if I feel like it, okay. Don’t tell me what to do pal.
I like the “edit:” append if I edited something, just to make it clear for whoever comes later.
What’s the problem with it?
if you see something which is worthy of a downvote: down vote and move on! Don’t engage with it and feed the algorithm/engament machine so other people are exposed to it when sorting by active.
Disagree. You should politely state why you disagree. Engagement is good for newer websites like lemmy and you don’t need to be rude or combative to disagree. One of my issues with reddit is when people would get downvoted for making a fair point or observation.
I really should have clarified this because it seems like a contradiction for me to state that down voting is bad, and to say that when you see something worthy of a downvote, downvote and move on.
When I say worthy of downvote, I don’t mean a disagreement. I’m talking about people being obviously toxic. If malicious people want a reaction, giving it to them is not productive.
For example, if I see a post about plant based meals, and a comment states “I’m not convinced that this is really helping the planet, I don’t see a problem with eating meat” - then engage politely.
But a post like “fucking vegans lol, I’m going to eat 2 steaks tonight” is not worth replying to. Downvote and move on.
My take for the fediverse would include:
-
Again, downvote not for disagreement but for content that clearly does not contribute to the discussion. Reason should not be given, as downvoting should be done sparingly and should not require a reason (for most sane human beings).
-
Be aware when interacting cross-instances. Culture, norms, and rules may differ.
-
Unless the instance operator is fine with it, limit your self-content sharing and self-promotion.
-
Remember that most of the fediverse instances are independent and they owe you nothing. The instance operator’s decisions are final.
-
Do not squat names on multiple servers unless it’s what you generally have been using.
-
Cats are still the supreme beings. The fediverse resides on the Internet (assuming that it runs on TCP/IP), so the cat supremacy rule applies.
Cats are corner-pissing vermin. Fite me.
HISSSSSSSSSSS
-
Marking edits with “edit” is fine by me, just don’t use ETA for that…
I’m very curious as to what people’s view on etiquette is regarding submitting your own content. I write a weekly newsletter about the fediverse which is pretty relevant to this community for example. But I’m also quite aware of reddiquette thats pretty hesitant on submitting your own stuff, as it can get spammy really fast. Would love to hear.
Personally, if it’s good content I don’t mind a little self promotion. People won’t see what you made if you don’t share it. Just don’t post it to dozens of communities, that’s when it gets way too spammy. Find one or two you think it would a good fit for and users would find relevant and share it there, as long as that community doesn’t have any rules against promoting your own content.
I don’t see any problem with that, and posting a weekly update is far from spammy behavior anyway.
I only agree with two rules: be awesome to each other (if in kind) and downvote is not a disagree button, it’s a troll button.
Dictating other rules, like the use of the edit keyword or how to measure scale of something… Is not awesome.
We don’t need to append “edit: typo” to edited posts and comments.
I didn’t do that because it was reddit etiquette. I did it because people can see I edited my post, and I would like them to be able to see why
Why tell them you fixed typos? What’s the point?
I’ve edited my comments for years to fix typos and clarify statments, and I never once had anyone accuse me of being disingenuous.
And even if they did, that’s their, and their conspiratorial mind’s problem.
Because otherwise people don’t know why I edited the post. Did I change my opinion? Did I add some context or detail I missed the first time around? Or did I just fix a typo? A reason just makes it easy for people to have more context
That’s the thing though, it’s a paradox.
Anyone who is considerable enough to use “edit:” for legitimate reasons would not be the people who would be deceptive and change their posts to reflect a new opinion.
“edit: typo” is essentially just a defense against an imaginary accusation that you were being malicious.
By all means, edit posts to include extra information as an appendage, but closing with “edit: added info” is not very helpful.
You misunderstand. I’m not doing it so that people know that I made a legit edit, I’m doing it so people know what the legit edit I made is.
but closing with “edit: added info” is not very helpful.
Who is doing that or arguing for that? Vague edit descriptions aren’t terribly useful, and I’m not claiming otherwise…
Okay I get you. I thought you were literally typing “edit: typo”, as opposed to something like “edit: she was my sisters friend”
I guess we both misunderstood each other lol. I wasn’t implying that was your argument, it’s just something I find annoying.
I mean, it depends on the context.
Did I make a post, have a lot of people get upset because I worded my post poorly? In which case, a I might make a clarifying edit like “edit: she was my sisters friend” so that future people that see my post don’t get confused.
Did I accidentally type “there’s” instead of “theirs”? I’d probably just edit it with “edit: typo”. Not because people care if I made a typo, but because I want people to know that it wasn’t the first type of edit
I agree the context is important, and the examples of rewriting large paragraphs justify clarification, both for new people and returning.
But the original point I made was that you don’t need to post “edit: typo” here on Lemmy. We don’t have edited post/comment tags, so nobody would know if it’s just typos
It’s really not that big of a deal anyway, I was just thinking of redundant examples of Rediquete to drum up the conversation.
The algorithm?
I wondered the same. There are “Hot” and “Active” categories on the front page but I’m not sure how they work. Perhaps commenting pushes a post further up the “Active” feed?
This is my impression too. I see day-old posts with new comments on refresh, so I’m assuming you’re right. Maybe algorithm isn’t the right word, but you get what I mean.
I rate this post 0.5
bannanasbananas. edit: typoTo be honest building a edit history views makes more sense to me. This project is opensource we can do more than work around.
What’s so wrong about using bananas for scale?
That’s their thing. You don’t take your new partner to the spot where you fell in love with your ex. That’s just weird.
That seems like a weird comparison…
Hey, when a banana is involved with love, there is nothing weirder, and more beautiful.
I think it’s polite to tell what you have changed when you edit a post as long as the platform does not have edit history visible (which as far as I can tell Lemmy does not).
If you add more context to your comment then sure mention it. But I don’t think it’s required for typos.
It’s not really an algorithm, you see posts based on the type and sort order you select. Sorting by “hot” counts votes, sorting by “active” counts posts. My default is Subscribed and New. When I get through all the new stuff I check Active and Hot.
In any case, yeah there’s stuff I hope not to see here. So far so good and hopefully it will stay that way for a while.
Fixed it to be more precise.
I suppose whether it’s an algorithm comes down to which definition you use.
I think the colloquial definition is something which is user-dependant and very complicated.
However, the dictionary definition is “a finite set of unambiguous instructions”, which fits my initial usage.
Strangely though, the colloquial definition doesn’t fit the dictionary definition, because the YouTube/Twitter/Facebook algorithms are so ambiguous that the people designing them don’t really know what they’re doing, since they are evolving by themselves.
Yeah it’s semantics, but to me an algorithm includes some kind of code to do something I’m not aware of or have control over, like a section of code that does a job in the background. In this case I think of something that pre-selects which content to put on my front page based on some logic I have no control over.
So… Elsewhere in this thread you keep stating that explaining why something is edited is not useful. But here I have no idea what your previous statement was or what you edited, and because you didn’t explain why you edited, I’m left guessing what your previous statement was.
This is precisely why people explain why they edit, otherwise the conversation loses context as edits occur. Hopefully you can step back and see why explaining edits is useful?
You actually don’t need to know what my previous statement was, because it’s totally boring.
I changed “algorithm” to “algorithm/engagement machine” because the first posts were about how the word algorithm is used.
To clarify, my gripe was not with edits, it’s to state that you edited for typos specifically.