this post was submitted on 24 Nov 2023
-49 points (14.5% liked)

No Stupid Questions

35831 readers
1093 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ada@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You still see it though, especially if it's a direct reply. And it is still a responsive system, that lets bigots just come back with new accounts and spew hate until they get downvoted in to silence, when they just come back with another account.

Whilst the latter problem still exists even with moderators, at least a moderator can reduce the number of people exposed to hate.

I've lived this. I have zero desire to use the system you describe, because I know it leads to toxicity that I don't need.

[–] cameron_vale@lemm.ee -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

For older bigots you would filter them away.

For brand new bigots. That might require a "if the person's history is too small, exclude" type rule. Which is less than ideal, yes. Lots of false positives there.

But let's not put the cart before the horse. I think it's a pretty good idea and I'd like to see it tested.

[–] ada@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

For brand new bigots. That might require a “if the person’s history is too small, exclude” type rule. Which is less than ideal, yes. Lots of false positives there.

Doesn't work. For trans folk particularly, throw away accounts not linked to their main account is often the first step of exploring their identity online.

[–] cameron_vale@lemm.ee 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)
[–] ada@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

This is all hypotheticals for you, based on some ideal you think is important.

It's lived experience for me. I told you it wouldn't work for many folk. Your priority is "free" speech ahead of well being, and well, as a member of a targetted minority on the internet, my priorities are in a different order

[–] cameron_vale@lemm.ee 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Well nothing validates like suffering.

[–] ada@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 11 months ago

There's nothing to validate. You asked a question, I answered it.

I don't want the system you describe. Should it ever exist though, if it appeals to you, then use it. Then we're both happy.