this post was submitted on 05 Aug 2023
687 points (76.0% liked)
memes
10407 readers
1789 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The issue occurs when purported facts are just merely opinions or regurgitating talking points, you used to see it heaps on Twitter, someone alright posting their mini rant and sprinkling in "facts"
The thing is at some point people with hateful messages win simply by debating and putting their hate out there. Choosing not to engage is everyone's right, nobody is obligated to debate anything.
Exactly. There are those few who are willing, able and good at debating hate mongers so that others can see. Most people aren't and that's fine. Hate doesn't deserve the attention; it deserves being ostracized.
It shuts down discussion that could sway people reading the discussion by not explaining why it is true and also shutting down anyone else trying to explain. I see it most frequently used by people who had a discussion sometime in the past and don't seem to understand that not everyone was there at the time.
Like I agree that a woman is the only one who should decide if she should terminate a pregnancy, but when that is the response any time someone asks why there is no opportunity for someone to explain why that is true for people who haven't ever had it explained to them. They don't have to explain, but they also don't need to shut down discussion.
Nobody is obligated to explain repeatedly the same point to every lazy idiot who can bother to STFW before asking a question. And then you have sealions and people JAQing off.
They are not obligated to explain, but they are not correct for saying that nobody else can.
I'd just say that existing good explanations elsewhere (and perfectly searchable ones at that), they shouldn't.
Ah yes, do your own research is a great way for uninformed people to find the right information.
No individual is required to do anything, but someone linking to a good explanation shouldn't be discouraged.
Your position seemed to be that every time a person ask a question, somebody should answer the question or provide the link even if the person hasn't bother to do any research first.
"How to ask questions the smart way" was written for a reason.
It would be great if you replied to what I said instead of what you assume I mean.
No, "they" don't need to shut it down, but "they" might want to and that's OK. If we're talking about forum mods, they might use their judgement to decide they don't want their platform to be a space for debating something that threatens the safety of their users.
You want to make your own forum where anyone can debate anything, then absolutely go right ahead. Doesn't mean somebody else can't make a forum they refuse to allow debate on certain issues.