I know MediaBiasFactCheck is not a be-all-end-all to truth/bias in media, but I find it to be a useful resource.
It makes sense to downvote it in posts that have great discussion – let the content rise up so people can have discussions with humans, sure.
But sometimes I see it getting downvoted when it’s the only comment there. Which does nothing, unless a reader has rules that automatically hide downvoted comments (but a reader would be able to expand the comment anyways…so really no difference).
What’s the point of downvoting? My only guess is that there’s people who are salty about something it said about some source they like. Yet I don’t see anyone providing an alternative to MediaBiasFactCheck…
you’re acting like I’m the person who made the argument. that entire first paragraph is an argument against what you said the first time.
I suggested a toggle feature, and you said they already exist and you don’t have a problem with them. so what’s left?
I might have not been clear, all my comments have been pro opt-out, not opt-in. I’m not sure where I was confusing in that so I will attempt to clarify
I responded to your comment of if “people genuinely wanted to use your bot, they would opt in” with my statement that that type of system is counterproductive to the freedom of choice that the Fediverse is built off, many people would never know the bot existed in the first place if it just doesn’t show. If you don’t like bots, fine, block them (or disable bot posts in settings if that button works, ive never personally tested it) and move on. Removing the choice from the users is not a fair option because it doesn’t preserve the freedom of the platform, which is giving everyone the choice.
It seemed like you have an actual hatred of bots in general, which is fine, to each their own, so I recommended that rather than subject yourself to having to deal with them, just turn them off. I don’t understand why you would want to subject yourself to seeing something you dislike.
I suggested opt in. you stated why you thought that was a bad idea, and mentioned the toggle option. I agreed that the toggle option was good. we have arrived at the same page as far as I can tell
also I see this a lot, don’t assume that everybody you meet on here is somehow a part of this monolithic fediverse. constantly I see people surprised to meet someone on this site with a differing opinion from them and they go, “I never thought I’d meet somebody like that HERE”. we are all individuals, and using a site doesn’t mean that you agree with, or even care about, the platform’s core principles.
I agree, everyone will have their own opinions of things, I do think there is a good reason to re-enforce the core values of the platform though, as that is the thing that separates this platform from the others. To revoke that would be to fall back against the same values that a lot of people on this platform joined it for, which is a decentralized freedom of choice platform. It was the main advertisement point of the fediverse, the ability to be free of a corporation or “superuser” choice. A lot of the people on the platform are a triage of “refugees” that fled to this platform from various sources either by limitation of speech or by their host site becoming toxic/unusable. As much as I hate “drinking the koolaid” I do have to agree that this the entire point of the freedom of federation is what makes this style of sites better than the other alternatives.