Memes

I've been accused of providing ai generated information then I've provided a wiki source and gotten more downvotes. I feel like the only possible way someone could be convinced that a fact is an ai hallucination is to have read the fact I provided, googled said fact, seen the fact in the ai summary and then decided "it's in the summary it must be false." That's such a hypocritical thing to do after accusing someone of being wrong and using ai in my opinion.

There was this one magical time where posting a source got this one user to change their mind and I don't know if I should be happy that it worked one time or sad that it's only worked one time. Also still got downvoted, only after the person I replied to admitted they were wrong did people start coming around but the ratio was still fucked. Something like 50 votes of them saying I was wrong to my like 5 providing a source.

With respect to Lemmy and Reddit (don't have much experience with other social media platforms), it often just comes down to the audience.

Some users and some subs are just so fragile and so propagandized that any tiny bit of resistance or any comment slightly against the standard is met with down votes and negativity.

On Reddit, I think my most down voted comment that's coming to mind was in an environmental sub. Someone mentioned that they didn't see any "bugs" around their outdoor lights the night prior even though those lights would have been covered in bugs when that person was a kid.

I acknowledged that I am fully aware that insect populations are in collapse/decline. However, what the person was witnessing wasn't a fair comparison because it was currently winter time where they lived (which was obvious from their other comments) and because modern LED lights don't produce as much heat or ultraviolet light (both things are highly attractive to nocturnal insects) as previous technology.

I think I got something like -342 on my comment within a day or two.

sauce

Wikipedia

ISHYGDDT

1 bajillion likes

don't forget that downvotes mostly help with sorting. they don't mean "this is wrong". they mean the reader didn't like it and it should be sorted further down or even start collapsed. it can just be a highly unpopular or disgusting truth ppl want to swipe under the rug. it can also be totally irrelevant or link/quote sites ppl don't like and want to reduce traffic to or be forgotten (reddit, xitter, fb come to mind)

it's just a quick feedback that can help the community.

The panels are out of sequence. The accusation goes after the Wikipedia post.

If it was here on Lemmy, there's a good chance many of the downvotes are the same person on multiple accounts engaging in vote manipulation. Probably true on Reddit, too, but much harder to confirm since none of that stuff is public.

u

Downvote. Back.