this post was submitted on 09 Nov 2026

347 points (80.5% liked)

Unpopular Opinion

unpopularopinion@lemmy.world

9,694 readers

2,294 active

904 users here now

Welcome to the Unpopular Opinion community!

How voting works:

Vote the opposite of the norm.

If you agree that the opinion is unpopular give it an arrow up. If it's something that's widely accepted, give it an arrow down.

Guidelines:

Tag your post, if possible (not required)

If your post is a "General" unpopular opinion, start the subject with [GENERAL].
If it is a Lemmy-specific unpopular opinion, start it with [LEMMY].

Rules:

1. NO POLITICS

Politics is everywhere. Let's make this about [general] and [lemmy] - specific topics, and keep politics out of it.

2. Be civil.

Disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally attack others. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Please also refrain from gatekeeping others' opinions.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Shitposts and memes are allowed but...

Only until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.

5. No trolling.

This shouldn't need an explanation. If your post or comment is made just to get a rise with no real value, it will be removed. You do this too often, you will get a vacation to touch grass, away from this community for 1 or more days. Repeat offenses will result in a perma-ban.

6. Defend your opinion

This is a bit of a mix of rules 4 and 5 to help foster higher quality posts. You are expected to defend your unpopular opinion in the post body. We don't expect a whole manifesto (please, no manifestos), but you should at least provide some details as to why you hold the position you do.

Instance-wide rules always apply. https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/

founded 3 years ago

moderation log

moderators

JonsJava@lemmy.world

technopagan@lemmy.world

Dremor@lemmy.world

Lemmy has a toxic negativity problem and it's scaring off new users (poptalk.scrubbles.tech)

submitted 1 day ago by scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech to c/unpopularopinion@lemmy.world

394 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Today has been especially bad, and was inspired sadly by about 6 straight posts of only negativity here.

I want to say that being negative towards something is not a bad thing, it's very valid to critique things. However, a community becomes toxic when the majority of it's content is negative.

Gaming is an obvious one. It's very obvious all around the internet that gaming communities are negative generally, and Lemmy certainly takes the cake. In the case of GTA 6 coming out this month we can (and have) had multiple stories about Rockstar's unethical practices, the pricing, ownership, and to be clear I agree with all of it. However, there is also valid positive things that people want to discuss but are immediately downvoted to hell, or have comments brigaded on with responses like "Don't you know about X, Y, or Z??"

I've been in comment threads where people have told me that they are afraid to post here because of the responses they might get. Now this is absolutely true everywhere, and we will often respond "You just have to tune them out" but the scales are shifting to the majority of responses are negative.

New users will not simply block/tune out the majority of commenters. New users will see that a community is toxic and turn around and go back to where they felt it was better.

This is the root of my frustration - that Lemmy is no longer a geeky place where people can talk about Star Trek and Linux - but that it's becoming a toxic place where if you aren't talking about why Star Trek and Linux are the only good things on the planet that it should be called out over and over.

Worse is that the scales a tipping to simply being "If it is popular, it is not good" which is a huge red flag for toxic community. To be clear it does not mean that if something is popular that it must be good, but instead we are falling for the same trap that is on corporate social media.

Anger and toxicity are fun, they are dopamine hits. So when there's a huge post about <> and everyone dogpiles, everyone has that dopamine hit and it spreads, and it makes people want to dogpile more. Unfortunately I think this has left individual posts, and this is now driving a large part of our comment sections, that people feel included when they are all dogpiling on a popular thing. It's addictive.

It's incessant and exhausting being here some days.

Some examples to think on:

Harry Potter fans (who have already said they will not buy anything from Rowling again and are aware) who still want to enjoy the books/movies they already own, but are shouted down and downvoted
Sports fans posting about football, to have jokes about "sportsball" made to them.
- (Is that really any different from nerds being made fun of by jocks in highschool, only this is in reverse and worse yet, we're supposedly more mature now?)
Freaking pumpkin spice. The world is on fire and people get a tiny bit of joy out of cinnamon and allspice, can we let them just enjoy that?!

I think that sums it all up, I wish people could just enjoy things here without having the majority of comments be about why they shouldn't enjoy it. I think this attitude has already lost of a good chunk of users who could be adding to the fediverse, instead now back on corporate social media.

It's anecdotal but I've shown the fediverse to 3 other people who are trekkie nerds like me. They gave up in less than a week not because the fediverse was complicated, but because they felt like they weren't wanted here.

Be the positive change, be encouraging. Don't belittle for someone for liking a popular thing if you like something more obscure, instead post about obscure thing and why you like it and share it! Inform users of things like Rowlings insane shit-headery, but don't demean them for still enjoying the books. If you don't like sports that's cool, but let them cheer on their team.

Thanks for listening. I'm going to have a pumpkin spice latte now.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] mechoman444@lemmy.world 3 points 14 hours ago (19 children)

I think this is a very valid and well-articulated critique of the platform, and I agree with several of the points you've raised.

I would add that one of the fundamental problems with Lemmy is that people are not using the voting system in good faith. Upvotes and downvotes have increasingly become a measure of whether someone agrees or disagrees with an opinion, rather than whether a contribution is relevant, factual, constructive, or adds value to the discussion. That was never what the voting system was designed for. Whether someone likes or dislikes an opinion is largely irrelevant to the factual accuracy or merits of the argument being presented. Unfortunately, people have conflated personal agreement with the quality of a contribution, and the result is an environment where dissenting opinions and perfectly reasonable discussions are buried.

There is also a significant moderation problem. Misinformation, propaganda, and low-quality engagement are rampant throughout the platform, and moderators are not doing nearly enough to address it. I suspect part of this is a consequence of the relatively small user base. Communities need content and engagement to survive, and there seems to be a reluctance to moderate aggressively when doing so might reduce participation. The result is that popular narratives, regardless of their factual accuracy, are allowed to dominate. This feeds directly into the bandwagon effect you're describing, and it's something I've noticed across a surprising number of communities.

I would also point out that Lemmy being federated introduces another challenge. Unlike Reddit, where people generally have a centralized starting point and a relatively straightforward way of discovering communities, Lemmy requires a little more effort. Finding the right communities, instances, and people who share your interests and approach to discussion can take time. Sometimes you have to sift through quite a bit of noise before you find the signal. That's not necessarily a flaw in federation itself, but it does mean that the quality of individual communities and their moderation becomes even more important.

Ultimately, I think the biggest problem is that a platform built around alternative communities and independent discussion is beginning to reproduce some of the worst behavioral characteristics of the corporate social media platforms it was supposed to offer an alternative to. The outrage cycles, tribalism, dogpiling, ideological conformity, and reward mechanisms are all there.

And that's unfortunate because Lemmy has tremendous potential. But a platform cannot grow if its existing users make newcomers feel unwelcome for having different interests, enjoying popular entertainment, or simply expressing an opinion that doesn't conform to the prevailing sentiment.

A community should be a place where people come together because they enjoy something, not a place where they compete to demonstrate how much they dislike everything else.