It’s a respectable goal but a broken implementation. Only one side of the story is presented, without opposition, without fact-finding or evidence. A court tha

It’s a respectable goal but a broken implementation. Only one side of the story is presented, without opposition, without fact-finding or evidence. A court that worked like that would be obviously broken. The consequences here are only validation, but the decisions are equally broken: virtually always, the poster is declared "not the asshole". And even if the story is presented even-handedly and thoroughly, Reddit's algorithm guts responses. It filters out thoughtful comments, nuanced stances, and minorities like experts and older people, it promotes split-second judgements, and over time it drives away people who resist those biases. Besides normalizing feedback, presenting only a single opinion instead of revealing that different types have different takes, the mentality it normalizes on is pretty immature. For example, tit-for-tat behavior is reliably supported (I've seen them OK destroying a man's life because he repeatedly spoke to the poster disrespectfully), and marriage is treasured only about as much as a second date ("other fish in the sea" comes out the moment somebody raises their voice).