I know MediaBiasFactCheck is not a be-all-end-all to truth/bias in media, but I find it to be a useful resource.

It makes sense to downvote it in posts that have great discussion – let the content rise up so people can have discussions with humans, sure.

But sometimes I see it getting downvoted when it’s the only comment there. Which does nothing, unless a reader has rules that automatically hide downvoted comments (but a reader would be able to expand the comment anyways…so really no difference).

What’s the point of downvoting? My only guess is that there’s people who are salty about something it said about some source they like. Yet I don’t see anyone providing an alternative to MediaBiasFactCheck…

  • Ellia Plissken@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I didn’t say I don’t like seeing them, I said I hate them. they represent nothing but spam as far as my emotional response

    • Pika@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I agree with op, It seems to be in your best interest to block them if they are effecting you that badly.

      • Ellia Plissken@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        I feel like I really shouldn’t have to. if people genuinely wanted to use your bot, they would opt in

        • Pika@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          they would need to know about it is my only issue with that. It’s better to know and opt out, that way you know that it exists. Otherwise there was resources that nobody would know existed otherwise. A users personal opinion shouldn’t impact other users, and forcing bots to be opt in would impact the people who would want to use them just are unaware they exist.

          No other major platform does bots as opt in, and that’s generally the reason for it

          • Ellia Plissken@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            lol so people’s personal opinions should only affect others so long as the effect is one you agree with? just make it one option for all bots. right when you sign up: do you want to see bots? check yes or no.

            this isn’t supposed to be like other major platforms. most sites are concerned with driving engagement and retention, and user-made bots is a really cheap and lazy way to do that.

            • Pika@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              No it would be stupid to think that, however if there is an argument between two ideologies, the side that gives the most Freedom should be the side that’s represented I would have thought the fediverse of all places would agree with that principle.

              Secondly that option already exists on at least the three instances I’ve signed up. I figured it was a universal setting, Whether that option actually works or not I’m not sure because I’ve never actually checked it because I don’t mind Bots if there’s one that’s annoying I just block it.

              As for your last part, I wouldn’t agree that Bots are a cheap way to drive engagement, most Developers won’t make a bot with the expectation of bringing more users to the platform or drive engagement, they make a bot to fill a gap in utility that the platform is not currently giving, Beit entertainment, moderation, informational. The only platform that I can think actively creates Bots with the intention of increasing monetary value and engagement would be Discord and even then that’s more of a stretch because it’s more Discord forcing the monetary features on the Developers

              • Ellia Plissken@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                you’re acting like I’m the person who made the argument. that entire first paragraph is an argument against what you said the first time.

                I suggested a toggle feature, and you said they already exist and you don’t have a problem with them. so what’s left?

                • Pika@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  3 months ago

                  I might have not been clear, all my comments have been pro opt-out, not opt-in. I’m not sure where I was confusing in that so I will attempt to clarify

                  I responded to your comment of if “people genuinely wanted to use your bot, they would opt in” with my statement that that type of system is counterproductive to the freedom of choice that the Fediverse is built off, many people would never know the bot existed in the first place if it just doesn’t show. If you don’t like bots, fine, block them (or disable bot posts in settings if that button works, ive never personally tested it) and move on. Removing the choice from the users is not a fair option because it doesn’t preserve the freedom of the platform, which is giving everyone the choice.

                  It seemed like you have an actual hatred of bots in general, which is fine, to each their own, so I recommended that rather than subject yourself to having to deal with them, just turn them off. I don’t understand why you would want to subject yourself to seeing something you dislike.

                  • Ellia Plissken@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    also I see this a lot, don’t assume that everybody you meet on here is somehow a part of this monolithic fediverse. constantly I see people surprised to meet someone on this site with a differing opinion from them and they go, “I never thought I’d meet somebody like that HERE”. we are all individuals, and using a site doesn’t mean that you agree with, or even care about, the platform’s core principles.

                  • Ellia Plissken@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    I suggested opt in. you stated why you thought that was a bad idea, and mentioned the toggle option. I agreed that the toggle option was good. we have arrived at the same page as far as I can tell