[CLOSED] a Beehaw survey on some policy and the site's vibes

good morning, Beehaw

this morning we have a survey for you, which will run for approximately three days. it contains three questions on site policy (plus an optional explanation field), and two questions about the site’s current vibe (plus another optional explanation field).

you can find the survey here.

some caveats to this survey

you likely have some priors for how this “should” work, and i would like you to leave those at the door. to be up front:

  • this is not a referendum—it is more like a Wikipedia vote if anything. we’re looking for a consensus or a synthesis of the community’s opinions with the practical limitations we’re working with, not a first-past-the-post winner.
  • this is not (currently) a democracy, and you should not expect public results from this. we talked this part over as an admin team and we don’t see much value in publicly releasing the results of a survey like this. if we do release the results publicly, we’ll be announcing that before it happens.
  • the same caveats just mentioned will apply to any surveys like this into the foreseeable future. i’m sure everyone understands that in online spaces it is very easy to manipulate surveys like this; accordingly, it is not a great idea to take them at complete face value until you can audit votes. since we don’t have a foolproof, private system for doing that yet, these caveats are necessary to make any kind of vote involving site policy work.

(we do eventually want to create a foolproof enough private system, but this is way on the backburner and i’m guessing most of you prefer having an imperfect way to chime in on the site’s direction than none at all until this system is created)

alyaza,
@alyaza@beehaw.org avatar

final call for submissions–the form will close in about four hours.

JillyB,

Anyone else having issues putting in your username? I’m typing but nothing is showing up in the field.

anon6789,

Wherever I find myself questioning the Beehaw restrictions, I browse All on lemmy.world. I can read All here with no real regrets. Anywhere else… Ehhhhhh

abhibeckert,

When I browse All on Beehaw I see a bunch of topics that I’m not even remotely interested in. I’m sure most of it is interesting to the members of those communities, but it’s definitely not how I use Lemmy.

When I go to my “Subscribed” tab on lemmy.world, it’s full of great content that isn’t available on Beehaw.

anon6789,

Perfectly valid way of doing it. I know a lot of people hate All on Lemmy or Reddit, and I get it. I just like to spend a portion of my time on All to see things that I would never learn about on my own.

I’ve been learning so much about Australia and NZ that I would never learn otherwise and I enjoy that. I’m in the US, so I’d never see local news from there if I stick to subscriptions. Do I want to learn all sorts of things about that? Not especially, but All lets me see what catches my eye. World just has a little too much to make it efficient, and the vibe in general is just more Reddit. Beehaw comes off more friendshipy to me, which also encourages me to participate in talking about things that I may not be as knowledgeable about.

But that’s just what I want for me, everyone else may want something else, but that’s why we have options.

aka_oscar,

The following question:

In your opinion, has Beehaw gotten less enjoyable to use since you joined?

Has some answers that confuse me. The options:

  • No, the site has not gotten less enjoyable
  • Have not observed a difference

Sound identical to me. I could see that the former implies its equal or better than before, while the latter states its just equal. But there is another option: “Actually, the site has gotten more enjoyable”, which clearly states its better than before.

If an option states no change, and another states improvement, I see no reason why there is an option which implies both.

alyaza,
@alyaza@beehaw.org avatar

If an option states no change, and another states improvement, I see no reason why there is an option which implies both.

some people don’t have the frame of reference, don’t have the confidence, or simply have not paid sufficient attention to state one way or the other whether anything has changed–which is distinct from actually being able to say the site hasn’t gotten less enjoyable. both options have been used fairly consistently to mean these, based off of the explanations box.

aka_oscar,

I see. Thank you for the clarification.

jarfil, (edited )

I want to see the results… not because of democracy, but because of curiosity about what others think.

If you want to prevent a scenario of “51% vs 49%” discussions, may I suggest publishing the results with rounded numbers, like “more than 20% think that [whatever]”. It would be informative enough as far as I’m concerned.

alyaza,
@alyaza@beehaw.org avatar

If you want to prevent a scenario of “51% vs 49%” discussions, may I suggest publishing the results with rounded numbers, like “more than 20% think that [whatever]”.

i think you’re unintentionally making a good case for why releasing results isn’t useful here in any form: if we have to take active steps to distort or fudge how the data is presented to prevent sectarianism or people feeling like they’re in a vast minority then it’s just easier (and more productive) for everyone if the data is kept with us.

jarfil,

Hm, maybe.

Personally, I wouldn’t mind finding out my views were “less than 10%” as long as it’s not a popularity contest/vote, it would actually interest me to find out why others might have a different opinion. My only concern would be data that could be construed as a divisive vote, instead of as a feeling to discuss.

On the other hand, I guess these topics have already been discussed, so maybe it would be redundant.

trashhalo,

✅ woman looks at camera in body armor and says I’m doing my part

ParanoidFactoid, (edited )
@ParanoidFactoid@beehaw.org avatar

deleted_by_author

    •
    millie,

    Honestly, I think defederating from some of the major instances is a big part of the reason it’s as nice here as it is. Beehaw doesn’t need to be a giant to have a place and a purpose, and it doesn’t need to be the only Lemmy instance anyone uses either.

    I think we all need to get past this nonsensical idea that everything has to be the biggest to be worthwhile. Nobody goes to a nice local restaurant and wishes they were at McDonald’s. It’s okay to just make something good and let it be. It doesn’t have to explode to monumental proportions, and when it does that’s not really that great a thing.

    Federation is an amazing tool in large part because of defederation. If instances aren’t using both they might as well all be screaming down the same meaningless content firehose, as far as I can tell.

    Auzy,

    I totally agree. I came here to get away from the toxicity which is growing on Facebook and other sites.

    If we’re going to survive, we can’t be yet another social network which grabs people who shout the loudest

    HappyMeatbag,
    @HappyMeatbag@beehaw.org avatar

    Agreed. Having an enormous user base isn’t inherently a good thing. We’re used to thinking that it is, though, because most of our experience is with for-profit websites. For them, that’s how success is measured.

    It’s great if you’re selling advertising space on your site, or if you want the maximum amount of potential customers for other products or services… but for sites like Beehaw, too much is simply too much. Constant growth isn’t worth the trouble.

    The concept people need to adjust to is that we’re interested in quality over quantity. We need enough users to keep the site active and interesting, but beyond that, things just get more complex and harder to moderate.

    millie,

    Absolutely. I feel like the constant competition for growth within capitalism pushes so many toxic ideas on us and this is just one more example. It’s all ego over substance and it doesn’t help anyone. 15 foot high pickup trucks with 3 feet of bed space. Same thing.

    Auzy,

    I’ve noticed some of lemmy in general is turning super toxic. At the beginning it was so positive, but it now feels like the wrong people have been attracted in some servers

    Not sure which servers, but the reality is, if something isn’t done, there is no point of me being here (it literally feels like the fatpeoplehate/thedonald crowd has started moving here)

    In fact, the positive environment was one reason I donated to beeshaw originally. We need more places like this. Everyone does

    ParanoidFactoid, (edited )
    @ParanoidFactoid@beehaw.org avatar

    deleted_by_author

    •
    alyaza,
    @alyaza@beehaw.org avatar

    But defederate the main lemmy instance? Self-defeating.

    just to be clear: we don’t think there’s intrinsic value in federating with the largest communities just because they’re large, and we will never federate (or maintain federation) with a community purely on the basis of its size or ostensible contribution to the fediverse’s activity.

    ParanoidFactoid, (edited )
    @ParanoidFactoid@beehaw.org avatar

    deleted_by_author

    •
    Seathru,

    Your opinion. But fact is, their choice is why some of us are here. Yes, I would like articles posted to lemmy.world to show up on my all feed here; No, I absolutely would not like to see lemmy.world’s entire userbase here. It would overwhelm the small mod team and likely kill the vibe. The slight inconvenience is worth it.

    jarfil,

    Lemmy.world is full of people who don’t want to “be nice”, and are happy to drag anyone “to the dark side”.

    If there was a unidirectional way of federating, like “let people from Beehaw participate on LW communities, but don’t allow LW users participate in Beehaw communities”, then it could be a viable option.

    Otherwise, just the (hopefully small) portion of bad actors on LW, would be enough to drown out Beehaw’s communities and overload the mods. There are already signs of mod fatigue on Beehaw even without federating with large instances that used to be “free for all”.

    Auzy,

    Exactly this… I’ve noticed the same on Facebook too these days. Plenty of fake profiles where people are clearly trolling, and some are plain bigots

    I’m not trans, or gay. But, even just watching some communities on Facebook and Reddit, you’re totally right. It has gotten to the point they are proud they are “anti-woke”, feel empowered and have made it part of their personality. Anti-Woke is just another way of describing someone who is controlling and abusive towards others, instead of accepting others. They’ll attack anyone they can to make themselves feel more in control.

    The community here doesn’t need to agree with EVERYTHING others say, but it should be an encouraging community. And I think I’m not the only one to say, I’d happily donate to keep the servers running if we are going to be unique, and not another reddit or facebook.

    acastcandream,

    If we weren’t supposed to defederate then we wouldn’t have the option. Nothing is stopping you from browsing it yourself anyway. You can browse world to heart’s content while the rest of us enjoy our quieter nook lol

    lagomorphlecture,

    Thr reason given for defederation with world is a lack of adequate moderation tools and open signups on that instance. Given the recent csam attacks on .world I have to say it looks like the admins had a valid point.

    wildeaboutoskar,
    @wildeaboutoskar@beehaw.org avatar

    Done!

    I respect your policy above but you may run into declining response rate in the long term without some kind of feedback, as there will be a ‘what is the point’ feeling. I may be wrong of course (and hope I am!), just something I’ve seen at work. I completely get your reasoning though.

    alyaza,
    @alyaza@beehaw.org avatar

    pleased to report we crossed the 200 response threshold earlier; i suspect we’ll have a pretty good sample size relative to the overall community when all is said and done

    misguidedfunk,

    Haven’t been around as much since school started back, but I filled the survey out regardless.

    heliodorh,
    @heliodorh@beehaw.org avatar

    Did my part! Thanks mods!

    acastcandream,

    this is not a democracy

    Seriously, huge applause for this. Beehaw is already operating 10x more intelligently than most forums I frequent. Y’all clearly know how to deal with bad actors

    Zevlen, (edited )

    deleted_by_author

    •
    acastcandream,

    UW?

    can,

    We’ll never find out.

    Cube6392,
    @Cube6392@beehaw.org avatar

    Abbreviation for UWU or UwU

    TehPers,

    Blue/white

    Gaywallet,
    @Gaywallet@beehaw.org avatar

    In the same way that I’m not in charge of the decisions when it comes to the tech side of things, I don’t want someone who knows nothing about a subject making decisions about that subject. I personally think it’s better to have someone trusted in charge and have strong transparency

    HappyMeatbag, (edited )
    @HappyMeatbag@beehaw.org avatar

    This brings to mind an interesting parallel. One of the ideas behind American democracy was an informed electorate - not just a bunch of ignorant rubes casting impulsive, careless votes. (Ensuring the existence of an informed electorate is also one of the reasons the first amendment was adopted, but that’s another topic.)

    Gaywallet, you are more informed than most of us, and you’ve demonstrated your qualifications. Even if this was a democracy, I’d trust you to vote on my behalf.

    Crotaro,

    I would love if not only the government but also the voting population consisted mostly (or only?) of scientifically literate and capable people. But I guess that brings the problems of “At what point does someone count as scientifically literate?” and that the issues of the “scientifically illiterate” possibly are (or seem, in their eyes) ignored/downplayed.

    As some dude-o, whose name I forgot, said:“Democracy is a horrible system. But it’s the best we got.” (probably botched that quote, too)

    HappyMeatbag, (edited )
    @HappyMeatbag@beehaw.org avatar

    I think what you’re talking about is called a meritocracy.

    Another good criticism about choosing a democratically elected president goes something like “anyone who wants that kind of power shouldn’t be allowed to have it.”

    cobra89,

    “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.”

    It’s frequently attributed to Winston Churchill but it was a common phrase that was said plenty before he said it.

    canni,

    Put simply, people are idiots

    Zevlen,

    deleted_by_author

    •
    canni,

    I think that’s a nice thought, but somewhat naive I think. Even if everyone had perfect information, you’d still have people who couldn’t effectively analyze what they were presented with. Even if they could, they wouldn’t have the time to do so. People are also famously selfish and short sited. A republic is a pretty practical tool, although it also obviously has its issues.

    sculd,

    Because it is easy to just create a lot of fake accounts on an internet forum. That is how Russia and CCP trolls operates.

    jarfil,

    Well now, don’t insult the CCP’s intelligence… never forget the “definitively fully democratic” vote about Hong Kong, where they had a 99% support, and a single vote against.

    There are many ways to subvert a democracy without the need for fake accounts.

    OnichiCub,

    Answered!

    DeForrest_McCoy,

    Never be afraid of using the DEFED hammer on those that deserve it. You guys are doing a Fantastic job of keeping this HIVE balanced and free of garbage extremist instances like shit.just.works, Lemmygrad and The general obnixiousness of hexbears.

    Thank you for you for giving us such a nice community. Keep up the good work.

    MiddledAgedGuy,

    Update: The survey provides this answer.

    What’s wrong with sh.itjust.works? Good faith question, genuinely curious. I don’t know much about the instance and in taking a quick peek, I see a lot of poking the hexbear but nothing else immediately sticks out.

    Lemmygrad and hexbear I’m familiar with why they’re problematic.

    Cube6392,
    @Cube6392@beehaw.org avatar

    Oh has sh.itjust.works started exibiting an extremist bias as a collective? Last time I was paying attention to them they were the sort of misguided centrist types whose instance was vulnerable to getting overrun with extremists. Sad to hear it happened, but not really all that surprised

    acastcandream,

    Forums that fashion themselves as centrist are always prime targets for ring wing asshats, sadly.

    Cube6392,
    @Cube6392@beehaw.org avatar

    People gotta learn every internet community that’s lasted long term has had strong moderation policies for a reason

    acastcandream,

    Exactly. Don’t let people weaponize free speech against you!

    MJBrune,

    It’s not that these communities deserve it. It’s that the moderation tools tools across instances isn’t built out enough for it to be all done within lemmy

    DeForrest_McCoy,

    Even Hexbear defederated shit.just.works for being a bunch of right wing nazi shit.heads… so yeah they definitely deserved it.

    MJBrune,

    Ah my comment was mainly in regards to lemmy world. I don’t know enough of shit.just.works I guess to judge it. I’ve seen a lot of name calling about instances and frankly I never see any proof. It’s just they said, they said. Lemmy is apparently developed by a bunch of tankies. So I have no clue what to truly make if this new social landscape where everyone is some extreme view. I’ve even seen beehaw being called names because they act quickly to defederate. It makes me miss Reddit where politically I didn’t care too much about who I was talking to as long as they didn’t mention Trump.

    HappyMeatbag, (edited )
    @HappyMeatbag@beehaw.org avatar

    I want to emphasize the “on those that deserve it” bit. That’s the part angry commenters will misinterpret or pretend to forget.

    Anyway…

    I have an account on kbin. It can be interesting to compare a thread when viewed here vs. being viewed there.

    Usually, a thread viewed on kbin has more comments - but many of them are crude, stupid, and antagonistic. The same thread viewed on Beehaw has a much more readable comment section, because of thoughtful defederating.

    Ideally, we wouldn’t have to defederate from anyone, but I don’t think we’re losing anything of value.

    Somebody was ignorantly making fun of Beehaw recently. I responded that I only want civil, mature conversations instead of arguments with trolls. I like the idea of a well-moderated instance that has a general guideline of “be(e) nice”. I want mods to have the flexibility to do their jobs effectively.

    ecirmada,

    “Value” - i feel you’ve hit the point perfectly.

    People are possibly perceiving a value loss in defederation, when in reality, letting in (on average) low value comments/content/whatever dilutes the instance’s value.

    PotentiallyAnApricot,

    Hive :)

    Jdreben,

    Thanks for doing this. Love this community.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • random
  • uselessserver093
  • Food
  • aaaaaaacccccccce
  • [email protected]
  • test
  • CafeMeta
  • testmag
  • MUD
  • RhythmGameZone
  • RSS
  • dabs
  • Socialism
  • KbinCafe
  • TheResearchGuardian
  • oklahoma
  • feritale
  • SuperSentai
  • KamenRider
  • All magazines
    •