I try to be mindful of my Lemmy image/persona since I try to be supportive and educational here. I don't have a problem with sharing my personal beliefs, but I try to keep it constructive and not too judgemental.
I've spent a lot of time cultivating the community where I spend most of my time posting content to, and I like all the comments people share on a daily basis because it's a positivity oriented community.
Between things in real life and fighting feelings of burn out here, it's been a bit tougher to stay motivated. One thing I've been noticing more lately, and I'm not sure how to deal with it, and I'm curious how you all deal with it.
If you have regular commenters that you like in your community, but you see them being kinda shitty in other communities, does that affect you?
I know there are stressful things going on just about everywhere, but it's tough when I see people I look to for positivity in return for my work having bad takes or saying things that make me feel less happy about them.
The broadest recent example is probably the Luigi/United Healthcare assassination. Without getting into a whole thing, I don't support it the way many have expressed here, but I can empathize with the reasoning behind why Luigi has broad support. But I see people I like saying what I feel are pretty hateful things, and I'm having a hard time separating what they show me of themselves in our positive space with what I'm seeing of them in the general Lemmyverse.
I don't know if I should just ignore it, but I don't feel there Is really any ideal way to discuss too much as I don't want to alienate people from my content. I don't use any alta as that just seems like too much work, but now I kind of want to avoid people a little bit.
Just curious if any of you go through anything similar and to see how you deal with it.
I've been open to most of the ideologies, but nobody ever presents a practical way to implement them. No one is up for mundane things like general strikes or labor collectives, so it's hard to convince me we'll see a Communist resurgence or horizontal power structure implemented at large scale anytime soon. I've no objection to the ideas behind those things, but praising ideas on social media and taking power are very different levels of involvement. Even the successes of Communism or Anarchism don't seem to have ever been that successful on a large scale or long term. I need something that is going to work in the near term, and if you have no idea, you shouldn't be afraid to say so. Being disingenuous isn't doing anyone any good. I want to be hopeful for the future too, but lies and pipe dreams aren't going to achieve it. It's not foolish to want those things, but without a roadmap to get there, it's not going to just happen.
Supposedly the reasoning is that whatever you do that is less than total overthrow of the entire system is not good enough. So strikes are "not good enough". This ofc ignores how totally overthrowing the government is also not good enough - see e.g. how Putin is managing "communist" Russia, or Whinnie the Pooh bear is managing "communist" China. Communism has never been managed to be implemented successfully irl. Yet somehow the tankies kNoW bEtTeR than literally everyone else world-wide about how things should be done? (Or else they are, however unwittingly, part of the disinformation campaign designed to further advance the Russian and/or Chinese agendas? indeed it is eery how both the Alt-Right and Alt-Left messages point to overthrowing the USA and UK and other governments, almost like that's the real goal all along, and whatever means to achieve that are simply convenient tools to use?)
Despite the lack of success of communism irl, people still advocate for murdering CEOs, as if that would somehow solve... anything? For one thing it's the system that is broken, and for another, the current level of technology is very much not on the side of isolated lone wolves who want to overthrow things. Moreover, the people I see espousing such ideas can't even seem to articulate a cohesive argument, much less a convincing one, i.e. they are full of shit and their ideas don't hold weight, and just bc they make the claim that they should have total freedom to speak their minds (which is ironic, considering how little "freedom" places such as Lemmy.ml offers its userbase), does not make it so. TLDR: liars often lie, perhaps first and most notably to themselves.
And even if they were going to actually do something - what makes it okay to discuss such a thing on the clear open web? On an instance that isn't theirs? And in a community that they don't bother to put in effort to moderate? And given how very often done from mere hours to days old accounts, even so much as contribute to at all? Like people were putting down Lemmy.World admins and mods for placing a brief (~24 hour iirc) hiatus on discussion of the very controversial and charged topic of jury nullification, which they (rightly imho) worried could have actual legal repercussions for instances in the USA. I mean, if you want to make your own instance, or your own community, then go ahead, but otherwise what right does someone have to complain about how some other admin/mod decides to do their business? Modding is a hard job, and people take it far too much for granted how much EFFORT is put into such by so many people across the Fediverse.
When people refuse to acknowledge the latter, that's when I know that they are not clear thinking people: totally ignoring the long- or even short-term ramifications of an action (like, what if the current mod were to be forcibly removed: what comes next, when so few are willing to do the task in the first place?!) is merely one sign among many that everything else that they say is similarly likely to be totally false.
Which doesn't make them subhuman or whatever, but does, to me, mean that they should not be in charge. So don't let them sway you, if they lack any convincing evidence to back up even the smallest portion of whatever it is that they are trying to say. Not everyone is equally likely to be correct on the Fediverse. Not even if similar things are said from one hundred accounts. What makes something correct vs. not lies in its agreement with actual reality, period.
I've been thinking lately how any revolution would even be possible. I grew up in the 80s with things like Red Dawn, but nowadays we have satellites, thermal imaging, photo recognition, license plate scanning, gps tagged personal communication devices, and every doorbell is part of a photographic spy network. The Wolverines wouldn't last a weekend.
Again, I don't want to crap on anyone's ideas necessarily, I just don't find too much of it useful to me outside of some unique case studies and philosophy. Which is fine is we're intending to talk about that. But I'd rather the political subs be about what candidates we do like, what bills we can support, etc. Yes, we have deep institutional problems, like any country, but tell me what we can achieve. We're all fallible people, and we're not going to get some messiah candidate to just appear. All politics is compromise. I don't need to love my dear leader, but I want to see them do more good than harm, which I feel is something that is still achievable.
Well, I thank you for your pretty rational to me opinions, but I don't want to go on here forever. The initial post was about not alienating more people than necessary, and I try to limit my political preaching to stuff about the environment. Thank you for the conversation though. I've enjoyed it, and your post history is pretty calm and regular talk, so you seem like a legit decent person. I'm glad you are here.
I'll leave you then with this thought: let's assume that the/a revolution has already occurred: what then?
Like "defund the police" is a slogan that people say often, or did before they switched to ACAB, but if we ever achieved that goal... what then?
In one sense, the internet was already an example of what comes next: like socialism, everyone is equal and can do whatever they want. Hence why virtually nobody wants to be a mod, bc it requires effort. Those who scream the loudest that their voices should matter (though curiously never their opponents, for some odd reason?:-P) are the very ones who absolutely refuse to lift a finger to do something for themselves - like spin up an instance, or create a community, or help mod an existing one. And those that do, like Midwest.social, end up making it an echo chamber where only people who agree are aloud.
Most of us need to wake up and realize that we are no good at like... things, and stuff, and junk. Hence why it behooves us to listen to a wider range of inputs. Except that's nearly never the real goal: that of appearing to win some argument online in order to salve our egos:-). Also truth really does take some additional effort to understand. And it lacks that sexy "punch" factor, i.e. it enrages people less hence gets shared less. For instance, if you want to know why I personally learn more towards a less extremist viewpoint, it is due primarily to videos such as this one: https://youtu.be/6spSrC9c8WE. Tbh I don't know fully how I should think about it all, except that I realize upon watching that there is more that I don't know than that I do.
But to reiterate the issue at hand: mod your community however you wish. I literally stepped down as head mod of [email protected] after creating it so that the community could move into a different direction - allowing for more serious discussions of contentious topic areas (like jury nullification). And that is what I wished: to both not hold anyone back from being able to discuss things if that's what they wanted, but also not having to be ultimately responsible for getting my instance in trouble with law enforcement agencies in the USA. I feel that I may not be explaining this well, so one more try from a different angle: you definitely have responsibilities as a mod to set forth good rules that people want to be governed by, but after that the users also have responsibilities to follow those rules. A few people who refuse to do that shouldn't be allowed to destroy all that you have built - which would be bad not only for yourself but also all the other members of your community. I hope that makes more sense!:-)
Ok, I think I'm starting to get why I'm enjoying talking with you. 😁
I am somewhat unique in that I am the main content provider of my community, but I am not a mod. I'm doing what I do because I wanted to see the community succeed and not die out. I didn't know too much when I started posting. I shared a few photos I had taken on trips, and by the time I ran out, nobody was posting anything still.
Now I've read hundreds of hours of subject matter, talked to experts in person, traveled hours to see the things in person, spent money to get hands on time with the animals I talk about. I've got over 1200 posts I believe about owls now. But I've stressed since the beginning that I am not a mod, I'm not an expert, and I want to be corrected if I'm wrong because I'm doing it for a love of the animals and a love of knowledge and learning, and I feel a duty to the community for them being my audience to practice teaching what I've learned.
For most of my working career, I wanted to finally be in charge. I got the chance once and it was nothing like I had expected. I got less done than ever and most of the time was spent dealing with people's bickering about pointless things. I felt less people listened to me or respected me than when I was just a regular employee.
I like to be efficient because I hate doing things I'm made to do any longer than necessary, but making money is sort of a requirement for survival. I find the best ways to get work done, and people end up gravitating to what I do, and if they want to learn my "tricks" I'm happy to teach them. I think it's important that everyone has the opportunity to advance if they wish and are willing to put in the effort. But I don't want or expect anything back. I'm happy to see them learn and grow.
I'm not concerned with being right or wrong, though of course I prefer to be correct when I talk. But if I make a mistake or misunderstand, I need to know about it so I don't keep making the same mistakes. Tell me in a respectful way, and I will be grateful, and do the same for you. That's how we all get better.
The things I love about learning is that the more I learn, the more I see I have to learn. I never want to stop wanting to know more, and that is self-gratifying and keeps me from worrying from outside praise.
If we have a revolution, I'll want to lend my ability. To the lefties, to the MAGAs, to the anarchists, and to the unaffiliated. We're just a bunch of know-nothings, and if we make it through a revolution, we're going to need to live together. I don't care much who you are or what you believe. I'm interested in your actions, in how you treat others and the world around you. Anyone can have "ideals" but what kind of life do you live?
I'll have to check out AskUSA and see if there's room for me to participate there. I also liked your video, though the comment section there looked about like what it would look like here. He summed up the Middle East situation very succinctly in much less time than I could have, and it was pretty impartial and reality based. There shouldn't be anything in what he said to argue about, though it's all absolutely open for reasonable debate. I think he's stated things very respectfully and nothing was out of line. I don't agree with it as a person, but his take in why we as a country are supporting what we are is totally plausible.
Sorry for misunderstanding / misremembering your "mod" status but you got the point perfectly regardless: it's one thing to be the absolute best worker that we can be, though it's quite another to be put in charge of things. The latter should kinda terrify us tbh, bc one has to balance so extremely very many things.
I've heard it said - and I don't know enough about the truth of the matter to either verify or contend - that the job of a manager is to say No to things. At a guess I would think it's far more but perhaps deep down, it's not? Either way, it highlights how very different the job of someone "in charge" is from us mere plebes. I railed against this thought for my entire life... but now I think I was wrong, all that time. And it is these newer kinds of thoughts then that give me pause when attempting to judge others who display knowledge that I am aware that I lack. e.g. the situation in Gaza is complex as fuck, but I just don't understand how people think that Trump could possibly in any way help there more than Harris would have - but hey, perhaps the people who scream BoTh SiDeS sAmE the loudest and/or most often must surely be correct? (/s)
And that's why I am against joining any kind of "revolution" until and unless I totally understand the issues, bc otherwise it's the same as the people who showed up on January 6 at the capital of the USA, ready to "defend the constitution"... except that's NOT what they were doing there AT ALL! But worst of all, they of all people didn't know themselves why they were there, or what they hoped to accomplish - how can you "defend" something that you refused to read in the first place? Real revolutions take time, and more importantly effort Case in point, if we want to wean off the world's dependency upon Reddit, then we need to actually make the Fediverse a place that people want to visit. Instead, we choose to remain a Nazi bar. And yeah, that bothers me, though I have little say in the matter. Except when it comes to myself that is, which is why I am commenting here from PieFed, which is not Lemmy at all (and yet the community we are both commenting in is). That more narrow issue I feel like I understand perfectly, so that one I've already joined a revolution for:-).
I saw my role in charge as to keep my people left alone as much as possible. I did the role for about 10 years before I was in charge, so I knew the job and what it took to get things done, and I knew the typical problems we had. I did what I could to get people what they needed to do their work with less disruption, I tried to even out some of the sexist pay discrepancy I saw, I reported people to HR for harassing my people, I got a nursing area set aside after the one had a baby, and I tried to keep the upper management from implementing idiotic changes whenever I could. I did my best to keep people from fighting with each other, and when I had to deal with somebody, I made sure I never criticized them in front of others.
One of the few times I did enjoy it was the one person I had to scold for something, and she started complaining why don't I ever talk to so-and-so about what they do wrong, etc. I said, look around, we are in the most quiet part of the whole building. I'm not doing this to make you feel bad or embarrass you or anything, we just need to get whatever it is done. Everyone I need to talk to, I treat the same way, because I don't get anything from making you guys feel dumb or mad or whatever it may be, we just have a set of goals we need to do.
I still filled in all the roles of the job, plus things only I could do, so nobody really ever had anything to come at me for. I looked at myself in the leader role as the head of the workers, not as one of the managers, because I honestly couldn't stand the management there, as somewhat indicated by the unfair pay and sexual harassment mentioned earlier. I just wanted people to be left alone if they were doing what they were asked.
Did I impose my will? Sometimes, but we collaborated on most things to try to get a consensus on things that could be compromised on. I wanted us to get jobs done, not have people annoyed or fighting all the time. I left them a lot of freedom to find roles they were good at in the department, and we did a lot of experimentation to find ways to make things better.
I eventually got booted from that role and then booted from the company after 12 years because they tried to do shady stuff and I kept reporting people to HR. They fired me for not being a team player. I don't miss them.