We've made some changes today, and we'd like to announce that our Code of Conduct is no longer in effect. We now have a new Terms of Service, in effect starting from today(October 19, 2023).

The "LAST REVISION DATE:" on the page also signifies when the page was last edited, and it is updated automatically. Details of specific edits may be viewed by following the "Page History" reference at the bottom of the page. All significant edits will also be announced to our users.

The new Terms of Service can be found at https://legal.lemmy.world/

In this post our community mods and users may express their questions, concerns, requests and issues regarding the Terms of Service, and content moderation in Lemmy.World. We hope to discuss and inform constructively and in good faith.

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

[–] unreasonabro@lemmy.world -5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

"vote manipulation" is not a real thing on the internet. Nobody is being elected to a position of power. Ergo the conditions required for the word to apply do not exist. The reason is not there. Having your post at the top of a web page for an hour is not equivalent to four years of direct influence upon policy.

Concluding that a couple extra updoots on a post merits deletion of someone's identity is more obviously bad behaviour than the problem it attempts to address, which is no problem at all.

Why are we copycatting the place everyone is trying to get away from?

[–] davis@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is a weird take. You're strawmanning hard here. Who was attempting to equate real life election fraud and vote manipulation? Completely separate things.

Also, vote manipulation is bad and should be avoided where possible. It undermines the purpose of voting, which is to allow users to determine what good content is. If vote manipulation is allowed, someone could decide that their content is good all on their own.

[–] unreasonabro@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Friend, we've imported a term from democracy to strawman with. You're familiar with the concept, therefore surely you can see that! The strawman IS the term from democracy, imported to lend significance to an insignificant act nobody actually does. YOU just used the strawman. If we gave the thing its own name it would not have the weight it seems to have now. Bots are a different problem, no real human does this thing by hand to any impactful degree. IT IS NOT A REAL THING and if anybody actually did it it would be pathetic, but certainly not a crime worthy of punishment.

Again, why import the failed model's rules? It's a made up problem, borrowing a name from a sphere of actual significance, to lend it credence so as to be a dick to people.

Just fuck off with all that noise, you know? (Not you personally.) The crime is not important enough to merit identity theft - or, oh dear, is that term too extreme to fit the situation too?

[–] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago

There were literally well-respected users who did this to garner admittedly pointless influence and suffered backlash because of it. Acting like people wouldn't do this when we have seen it done is really bizarre. And your hyperbole makes it even harder to take your stance seriously.