4 ms·

> It's in part the upvote / downvote, an horrible gamification of online discourse triggering your need to win the "spectators", even if you end up not having a

> It's in part the upvote / downvote, an horrible gamification of online discourse triggering your need to win the "spectators", even if you end up not having any vote at all because no one cares. Not everyone plays that game. I upvote all of my opposition in reasonable, heated arguments on Reddit to give them an advantage. That way, if my ideas truly have merit, the wisdom of the crowd will let me know. It’s a way to check myself and call BS on my own ego.

thunderclaps 4y ago
My current approach to the Reddit game is reportmaxxing. I'll make innocent-sounding comments with subtle triggers that will enrage some people, then pretend I have no idea what they're talking about in their furious replies, politely winding them up this way in our back-and-forth until they say something rash that I can report them for. If I can frustrate them enough to make a violent threat, that's usually enough to get their account permanently banned. And then I win. I got an account with an 11-year history wiped out the other day, that's my high score so far. Good times.
- callalex 4y ago
  An accurate summary of your comment is “making people upset makes me happy” and I just want to make sure you’re aware of that.
  - thunderclaps 4y ago
    I like to think of it as freeing them from the conversational prison that is Reddit. As such, I'm essentially doing them a favour. If I didn't find this so personally enjoyable, it would be a wholly selfless act.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
  - giardini 4y ago
    There must be bots that do this. I need to look through that old Cambridge Analytica code (or use ChatGPT 4).
- rationalist 4y ago
  That sounds like trolling.
- nocsi 4y ago
  I’ve seen a lot of people doing this across many platforms now. It’s the equivalent of baiting someone into punching you then calling the cops
- ux-app 4y ago
  as the kids say these days: you need to touch grass my dude :)
- maccam94 4y ago
  This is called dog whistling, and is frequently used to subtly spread racist and fascist views. If you're not doing that, arguing in bad faith is a waste of everyone's time and provides no value to the world. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_whistle_%28politics%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_whistle_%28politics%29
  - red-iron-pine 4y ago
    Once again we reflexively make it about race. It's basically Goodwin-ing a thread at this point. Parent poster could just be an asshole trolling people.
themulticaster 4y ago
This is the way. In theory, you're only supposed to downvote comments that don't contribute to the discussion. For me, that mostly amounts to very rude/unhelpful comments or extremely flawed arguments (flat earth level, not just arguments I strongly disagree with). On the other hand, I find it's easy to be downvoted into oblivion for no apparent reason. I find it hard to just ignore and forget about those threads, even though I know I should. Example (sorry, I have to get this off my chest): a redditor with a history of substance abuse started with winemaking (as a hobby) and asked how many glasses of wine they could safely consume. A physician (verified in that subreddit) responded that two glasses every day would be fine. I commented (as a medical layperson) that suggesting OP that it's safe to drink two glasses of wine every day (not just every now and then) might not be a good idea considering their history, at least to my knowledge. Suffice to say, that day I learned that some people seem to be easily offended when commenting about reasonable alcohol consumption considering past addictions. Or perhaps I'm vastly overestimating the risks of substance abuse disorders...
- throwawaysalome 4y ago
  Hard to put my finger on why that shit is so objectionable, but yeah, your response deserves the reddit equivalent of a swift kick to the groin.
- giardini 4y ago
  themulticaster says>"Suffice to say, that day I learned that some people seem to be easily offended when commenting about reasonable alcohol consumption considering past addictions. Or perhaps I'm vastly overestimating the risks of substance abuse disorders..."< I agree with you. Perhaps they read your post after their second (or later) glass of wine!8-)).
red-iron-pine 4y ago
> That way, if my ideas truly have merit, the wisdom of the crowd will let me know I thought that was a good idea, until I started seeing posts about stuff I knew really well.
- sammalloy 4y ago
  > I thought that was a good idea, until I started seeing posts about stuff I knew really well. There’s no perfect system or perfect just-world. Like you, I see mistakes like this all the time on Reddit, with some of the best examples of what you describe found on r/todayilearned. And I’ve seen lots of cognitive bias at work just like you have. For example, if multiple people downvote someone who has the correct answer, other people will often jump in and follow the downvoters just because of the bandwagon effect. When my Reddit account gets more than 100,000 karma, I will often abandon it and start over, because people tend to upvote accounts with higher karma instead of honestly appraising the content. I love starting with zero karma and watching all the dynamics play out with a fresh account to limit this kind of bias.

thunderclaps 4y ago

My current approach to the Reddit game is reportmaxxing. I'll make innocent-sounding comments with subtle triggers that will enrage some people, then pretend I have no idea what they're talking about in their furious replies, politely winding them up this way in our back-and-forth until they say something rash that I can report them for. If I can frustrate them enough to make a violent threat, that's usually enough to get their account permanently banned. And then I win. I got an account with an 11-year history wiped out the other day, that's my high score so far. Good times.

callalex 4y ago
An accurate summary of your comment is “making people upset makes me happy” and I just want to make sure you’re aware of that.
- thunderclaps 4y ago
  I like to think of it as freeing them from the conversational prison that is Reddit. As such, I'm essentially doing them a favour. If I didn't find this so personally enjoyable, it would be a wholly selfless act.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- giardini 4y ago
  There must be bots that do this. I need to look through that old Cambridge Analytica code (or use ChatGPT 4).
rationalist 4y ago
That sounds like trolling.
nocsi 4y ago
I’ve seen a lot of people doing this across many platforms now. It’s the equivalent of baiting someone into punching you then calling the cops
ux-app 4y ago
as the kids say these days: you need to touch grass my dude :)
maccam94 4y ago
This is called dog whistling, and is frequently used to subtly spread racist and fascist views. If you're not doing that, arguing in bad faith is a waste of everyone's time and provides no value to the world. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_whistle_%28politics%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_whistle_%28politics%29
- red-iron-pine 4y ago
  Once again we reflexively make it about race. It's basically Goodwin-ing a thread at this point. Parent poster could just be an asshole trolling people.

themulticaster 4y ago

This is the way. In theory, you're only supposed to downvote comments that don't contribute to the discussion. For me, that mostly amounts to very rude/unhelpful comments or extremely flawed arguments (flat earth level, not just arguments I strongly disagree with). On the other hand, I find it's easy to be downvoted into oblivion for no apparent reason. I find it hard to just ignore and forget about those threads, even though I know I should. Example (sorry, I have to get this off my chest): a redditor with a history of substance abuse started with winemaking (as a hobby) and asked how many glasses of wine they could safely consume. A physician (verified in that subreddit) responded that two glasses every day would be fine. I commented (as a medical layperson) that suggesting OP that it's safe to drink two glasses of wine every day (not just every now and then) might not be a good idea considering their history, at least to my knowledge. Suffice to say, that day I learned that some people seem to be easily offended when commenting about reasonable alcohol consumption considering past addictions. Or perhaps I'm vastly overestimating the risks of substance abuse disorders...

throwawaysalome 4y ago
Hard to put my finger on why that shit is so objectionable, but yeah, your response deserves the reddit equivalent of a swift kick to the groin.
giardini 4y ago
themulticaster says>"Suffice to say, that day I learned that some people seem to be easily offended when commenting about reasonable alcohol consumption considering past addictions. Or perhaps I'm vastly overestimating the risks of substance abuse disorders..."< I agree with you. Perhaps they read your post after their second (or later) glass of wine!8-)).

red-iron-pine 4y ago

> That way, if my ideas truly have merit, the wisdom of the crowd will let me know I thought that was a good idea, until I started seeing posts about stuff I knew really well.

sammalloy 4y ago
> I thought that was a good idea, until I started seeing posts about stuff I knew really well. There’s no perfect system or perfect just-world. Like you, I see mistakes like this all the time on Reddit, with some of the best examples of what you describe found on r/todayilearned. And I’ve seen lots of cognitive bias at work just like you have. For example, if multiple people downvote someone who has the correct answer, other people will often jump in and follow the downvoters just because of the bandwagon effect. When my Reddit account gets more than 100,000 karma, I will often abandon it and start over, because people tend to upvote accounts with higher karma instead of honestly appraising the content. I love starting with zero karma and watching all the dynamics play out with a fresh account to limit this kind of bias.