If the descentralization of social networks continue, we will have to prepare for the eventual rise of the instances wars, where people will start to fight about which instance is better and which one is weird to be in and so on, but that’s for the future of us all.
Perhaps keeping topics de-centralized is a key part of keeping systems from turning tyrannical. That’s the theory behind the term “totalitarian”: that too much unification of thought produces behavioral restrictions, via the justification that if the truth of each topic is known and indisputable, then there’s no reason to share power in society as long as the person in power knows the One Truth.
Centralized systems designed to uncover one clear answer, such as stack overflow, have every reason to fight against redundancy in answers. Anything rightly called a community though should not be built around the (totalitarian) idea that conversations are best centralized and made non-redundant.
Big important questions need to be rehashed millions of times, not just covered once with millions of audience members.
99% of the content people post and interact with doesn’t have a reason for multiple copies of it’s conversation to exist. Most content is consumed not discusses.
Yet when a person arrives and asks a question they are discussing. If they wanted to consume, the could.
And the vast majority of the users consume the answers, not the discussion. They don’t ask the questions, hey look them up, and if no one asked, or no one answered, they can’t find anything and just give up. They don’t ask.
And some of them don’t even bother with trying to look it up. They just ask, because they like that method of getting information.
Most communities do not like when people come in asking the same basic questions over and over again. I don’t think you understand how link aggregators work.
I don’t think you understand how communities work. Conversations get repeated all the time in communities.
A community for determining the answer to each question once should be structured like stack exchange.
Reddit is a place for discussion.
reddit is a link aggregator. its for people to find links, post them to relevant groups who then evaluate the quality and relevance of that post, and then vote to bring it up or down in the feeds of people subscribed to that group. that’s how reddit works. its a very poor way to hold discussions because it means any unpopular opinion gets downvoted by ignoramuses who don’t understand that they’re evaluating for quality not for agreement. reddit is not a place for discussion.
Then what are we doing here, right now?