Unpopular Opinion

6339 readers

80 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.

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

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

Rooki@lemmy.world

JonsJava@lemmy.world

admiralpatrick@lemmy.world

lemann@lemmy.world

ptz@dubvee.org

[Lemmy] mods, there’s no point to moderating content for “misinformation” if you don’t link to a fact correcting article (lemmy.cafe)

submitted 1 day ago by spujb@lemmy.cafe to c/unpopularopinion@lemmy.world

22 comments fedilink hide all child comments

hate twitter, but this is something its community notes gets right. it takes all of two clicks for us to see a removed comment and when it’s “Reason: misinformation” that does nothing to combat the misinformation.

like you don’t have to link articles for obvious stuff like antivaxx shit (though that’s appreciated). but when it’s like deep lore on political parties or terrorist groups, or when the comment is like 80 paragraphs long “reason: misinformation” doesn’t really cut it and doesn’t inform the community of what specific point(s) of information were false.

for all but the most egregious misinformation (such as those encouraging or threatening harm, which should be modded anyway for those reasons), if you can’t link an article in the modlog it’s almost better to leave the comment up and let your community do a paragraph by paragraph fact check for you. otherwise it’s just kind of festering out there unchecked, your servers are still hosting the misinformation, just in modlog form.

i think giving info correcting links was more common in the past so no idk why it’s uncommon now. hoping this can be some friendly constructive criticism :)

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

[–] spujb@lemmy.cafe 11 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

also fair.

a mod here suggested forcing users to cite dubious claims which i do like the vibe of. puts the labor of research on the potential perpetrator.

[–] KeepFlying@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

Sourcing just shifts the problem to having to verify the source though. Antivax people could easily cite thousands of sources. We'd know there bullshit, but some mod would be stuck needing to vet them.

It's easy for common misinformation like antivax, but more unusual claims could easily be left around just because they have something seemingly relevant linked.

I don't disagree with the idea, it just isn't enough of a fix and would still require a lot of work.