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
[–] 37 points 1 day ago (25 children)

Here's a key thing I think you're missing about Lemmy: Lemmy is anti-corporate and anti-capitalist by nature. That is the single thing that pretty much all Lemmy users hold true. That's why we're here. It's not all negative. It's negative when you're trying to push a product, especially when it's made clear it hurts other people.

Try discussing an indie game, especially one with a good track record of treating employees well, or one owned by a cooperative. You will almost always see positive responses. Lemmy users are happy to support good things. They're also skeptical of corporations (for good reason) and are quick to turn against them when it turns out they're run by bad people.

I'll give you an example: Anyone who sees this, what is your favorite indie game, and what about it is special to you? Mine is probably the incredibly standard response of The Outer Wilds. It has so much soul and understanding for the human experience, and it gives you the freedom to discover it for yourself.

  • source
  • hideshow 25 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 1 day ago (2 children)

    I've been playing lots of Dead Cells and Hades lately. A couple of my favorite indie games for sure.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    The Hades games are amazing! I really need to give Dead Cells a try. I've played like 10m of it maybe years ago, but I never purchased it myself even though it seemed pretty appealing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    OUTER WILDS SUCKS!!!!

    Not true at all. Just trying to set off OP.

    The only concentrated negativity I see on Lemmy is regarding politics. But that's normal. Politics is a bummer even during normal times and we are not living in normal times.

    Favorite indie game right now is Mycopunk. Cool coop extraction shooter that just expanded to console.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

    Is slay the spire indie? I also like salt and sanctuary! Into the breach? I don't really know what indie means, just a divestation from big corpo I imagine. I will be looking at the responses from the op for ideas tho!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 day ago (3 children)

    We can absolutely express those views with kindness and inclusivity, too, though. It's all in how you say it. Bring a friend into knowledge with you, rather than berate a stranger for getting it wrong and not knowing. You can say anything with kindness. And kindness comes back at you when you do.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

    I couldn't agree more. I always advocate for turning current enemies (if that's the right term for this situation) into potential allies. However, I also understand the frustration. When something like GTA takes up so much of the current gaming space, telling people to shut up seems fairly reasonable. You can't stop hearing about it everywhere else, so trying to prevent it from taking over Lemmy is not a bad goal, particularly when the company making money off of it are union busters.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago (1 child)

    Yeah, I could absolutely understand that being super annoying, maybe the answer is to just change the subject or make a post talking about something else to redirect the conversation?

    I have kids with autism, they info dump incessantly, if someone is excited to talk about something, it's rare for me to want to silence them and I'm super used to sitting through subjects I'm not really super interested in hearing about for the 2 millionth time, but I can't kill people's joy. I usually try asking questions to redirect to things about it I would like to hear, or ask about something else totally random that's a bit of a brain scratcher.

    Gta 6 is big, it's been a long road for a lot of people too, so they might really be struggling and have been hanging out for this. We might just have to let them chat among themselves for a bit, if we don't have anything positive to add.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 1 day ago

    someone is excited to talk about something, it's rare for me to want to silence them and I'm super used to sitting through subjects I'm not really super interested in hearing about for the 2 millionth time, but I can't kill people's joy.

    This is the issue. You're viewing it as affecting the person posting. That's not really why people downvote or are negative. It's for the people who haven't purchased it and have considered it. The goal is to normalize not purchasing the game from this company that does harm, and to un-normalize the opposite, which they have spent so much money on making true.

    The person posting has already made the purchase presumably. It doesn't matter if you even could change their mind. It's to make the person who sees it think maybe there's a good reason to not purchase it, because so many others think this way. All that they've heard outside of Lemmy is almost totally that "it's the biggest game of the decade and you're missing out if you don't play it day-one." There's a lot of money and momentum behind that. Changing that opinion is moral, and I think it's worth the cost of a handful of people being annoyed. If they were going to leave for that then they were going to leave eventually anyway.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (5 children)

    I agree with you, but there are like a hundred million people excited for GTA6, and those people might not feel welcome if they come here and try to discuss that excitement. Same with whatever big new Marvel movie. Or a big update to Windows, Fortnite, and other popular things.

    Stuff like that seriously cuts down our potential userbase. I think we don't need to go into every post about Windows and remind people that we hate Microsoft, we can just ignore the post instead.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 day ago (4 children)

    Maybe it does, but maybe it also cuts down on the number of people supporting horrible companies. What's worse? Having a few less users or standing up for what's right?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 day ago (3 children)

    Maybe, but it's hard for a person to oppose EVERYTHING that's bad. They might oppose most bad things but they just want GTA6, and then we drive them away. We drive them away for any one thing. We don't allow a single guilty pleasure.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago (2 children)

    I get your point, but what's the end result? Someone will like everything. Should we not speak out about racists because it may push someone away?

    The issue is people needing to be validated for everything. If you want to play GTA then fine. I'll think less of you for purchasing it, but if you don't want anyone to speak against it then you're making it other people's problem. We don't need to validate someone in fear of offending them. You can hold whatever opinion you want, and you should feel comfortable with it. Telling other people they need to support that opinion is infantile. If you need to be validated on your opinion then listen when people tell you they're bad. If you just want to play the game then that's on you, not anyone else. You don't need to be a child and have other people tell you it's ok.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    It's not so much for validation, it's to share the experience and socialize about it. If they post here excited about GTA6 and they get dog piled, they're just gonna leave the Fediverse. Some people are ok with that, but we're shrinking faster than we're growing, which is dangerous, especially if it snowballs. And it prevents niche communities from gaining momentum. You're not going to change their minds anyways so why bother making them feel bad? I think social media is not for changing people's minds, it never works.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 day ago

    I think you're missing the purpose of 99% of comments on social media. It's not about changing the mind of the person posting. If it were, you'd use private messages. It's about influencing people who may see it.

    If praising the game causes others to purchase it, that's something we want to avoid. Companies pay a lot of money for social media posts for this reason. It's an incredibly useful and invasive form of advertising. If Lemmy falls to that then it's dead anyway. It's what ruined Reddit, and so many other sites. If the population decreasing to former levels is the cost of not becoming a corporate advertising space then it's worth the cost.

    I don't know if what you say is actually true though. Is the population decreasing? Last I saw it was increasing. Do you have data for that.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -9 points 1 day ago (4 children)

    not everyone here is a naive anti-capitalist

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 13 hours ago (1 child)

    Also, as an aside; don't call them liberals, they'll hiss at you. In their vocabulary, liberals aren't those who value liberty, but traitorous corporate shills who still claim to be left wing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 hour ago

    To be fair, the Liberal thing isn't something the left caused. It's caused by the Liberals (capital L). Liberalism is fine, but the Liberals (in America at minimum, but most places) are those who support the status quo and Capitalists.

    Word can be confusing. There is a lot of nuance. It's similar to Anarchism being against hierarchy, but anarchy being lawlessness. Even though they have the same base, the capital letter carries a very different meaning. It's the difference between the political group and the dictionary word.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 14 hours ago

    I have come to realize that the anti-capitalists here are not raging communists in the traditional sense, but subversive progressive liberals who have developed their own vocabulary. This vocabulary is confusing to people outside, because to us anti-capitalism means like... Stalin. But ask someone their specific platform and it'll be a pretty reasonable take on reducing the power big buisness has on the average person.

  • source
  • parent