3 ms·

Someones conspiracy theory is someone else's truth. And often they become everyone's truth after some time, see the lab leak theory for a recent example. This i

Someones conspiracy theory is someone else's truth. And often they become everyone's truth after some time, see the lab leak theory for a recent example. This is the internet, you don't get to control what others say and still get to speak your own mind. I assume you don't need to back your claims up, am I right? Just dropping the magic words is enough. I hate that word with a passion, it's used as the one and only argument to shut down discussion. Did you know that Google recently changed their terms to allow to censor results during "special events" or some bullshit like that? Big-tech trying to control the narrative is not a conspiracy theory, it's in the open. If you don't have the attention span to argue your point or ask for an elaboration just move on. We are in the comment section for the discussion not for validation from the hive mind, right? Am I expecting too much from HN?

jsnell 3y ago
See, this is funny, because it's actually you who is trying to control others, by demanding that they put in time and effort on engaging with low quality and low effort content rather than just downvote and move on.
- worksonmine 3y ago
  "But what about you". No, I don't. I'm arguing that downvoting is a lazy way to discuss. It's anonymous, drive-by and a completely useless way to speak your mind. I'm arguing that the option to downvote discourages discussion. They don't have to engage at all if the quality was so low. What about the comment was low quality? How can it be improved? Are the claims incorrect? Or was someone just offended? All that information is lost with the downvote and there's no way to find out. If they know so much better why don't they use that knowledge and educate? What is low quality is subjective, I don't think the comment was low quality, but the downvote brigade managed to hide it. It's a shame because this could've been an interesting thread. Ironic given the context don't you think?

jsnell 3y ago

See, this is funny, because it's actually you who is trying to control others, by demanding that they put in time and effort on engaging with low quality and low effort content rather than just downvote and move on.

worksonmine 3y ago
"But what about you". No, I don't. I'm arguing that downvoting is a lazy way to discuss. It's anonymous, drive-by and a completely useless way to speak your mind. I'm arguing that the option to downvote discourages discussion. They don't have to engage at all if the quality was so low. What about the comment was low quality? How can it be improved? Are the claims incorrect? Or was someone just offended? All that information is lost with the downvote and there's no way to find out. If they know so much better why don't they use that knowledge and educate? What is low quality is subjective, I don't think the comment was low quality, but the downvote brigade managed to hide it. It's a shame because this could've been an interesting thread. Ironic given the context don't you think?