this post was submitted on 29 Sep 2023
273 points (97.6% liked)

Asklemmy

43978 readers
649 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

So a view I see a lot nowadays is that attention spans are getting shorter, especially when it comes to younger generations. And the growing success of short form content on Tiktok, Youtube and Twitter for example seems to support this claim. I have a friend in their early 20s who regularly checks their phone (sometimes scrolling Tiktok content) as we're watching a film. And an older colleague recently was pleased to see me reading a book, because he felt that anyone my age and younger was less likely to want to invest the time in reading.

But is this actually true on the whole? Does social media like Tiktok really mould our interests and alter our attention? In some respects I can see how it could change our expectations. If we've come to expect a webpage to load in seconds, it can be frustrating when we have to wait minutes. But to someone that was raised with dial-up, perhaps that wouldn't be as much of an issue. In the same way, if a piece of media doesn't capture someone in the first few minutes they may be more inclined to lose focus because they're so used to quick dopamine hits from short form content. Alternatively, maybe this whole argument is just a 'kids these days' fallacy. Obviously there are plenty of young adults that buck this trend.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yes the karma system here is way better! It definitely reduces the hive mind mentality.

I don't think we need any kind of algorithm though. That would only serve to make the popular stuff more popular and the niche stuff gets buried. Maybe if I could personally filter out communities that I'm not interested in?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

Yes the karma system here is way better! It definitely reduces the hive mind mentality.

Sure, but we have to make sure we communicate what the up-/downvote function actually is for. Many Reddit-refugees would otherwise just keep it as a "I agree"-button, and nothing would change for the better.

Maybe if I could personally filter out communities that I’m not interested in?

I agree with the sentence before, but I don't think filtering out everything you're uninterested in is remotely possible. Yes, you can filter out some specific communities you dislike, like all those Linux-subs, if you find them annoying. (OH, btw.: That was a comment in one of their/ our memes, and when one guy, coming from outside the sub, complained this stuff is constantly on his trending page, someone suggested "We're only 3 popular subs. Just blacklist us and you'll never hear from us again" it really resonated with me!)

Alternative?

I personally would rather enjoy a "promote" than "bury" function, something like a "GigaUpvote™" for posts you wish others to see too. Market the up- and downvote button as a quality filter, especially for comments, and if a post gets a certain ratio of up- and downvotes, comments and promotions, it will appear on the "popular"-tab.

Just as an additional function, IF YOU WANT. Keep the "old" spirit for those who prefer it, and suggest it for newcomers to find new content. And make it easy to toggle off for social media junkies like myself.