Recently, we merry mods have been noticing many-a-comments being in the report queue for perceived negativity (the aim of the community being to provide “a break from the incessant negativity and rage”). What actions should we do about these, if any? Do we need a newsome another-rule for this?

Here’s what I think: Some skepticism and scrutiny is always quite needed knowledge—especially against information that’s actually untrue/misleading—and any bars I can think of for removing negative comments would apply to reasonable skepticism as well. Thus, the mod team is asking y’all to drop some bars!

Edit

Assorted examples of reported comments

Actually, you’ve missed the mark. It’s not whining about an advancement, it’s legitimate criticism of the US health industry. He’s just saying what we all know to be true which is that regardless of technological improvements, lifesaving care will continue to be ruinously expensive for those that are able to access it and gatekept from many others.

If you have a problem with comments like these undermining celebration of scientific progress, then maybe you should think about the structural political issues that lead people to disillusionment and cynicism rather than labeling people as conspiracy theorists.

You know “big red“ voted for Trump. It’s a cute story, but I hope he gets what he voted for In the end

It’s too bad that curing patients is not a sustainable business model. Even if this did work we would only ever see it developed if you had to take it twice a month for the rest of your life in order to survive.

Edit: sorry, I just noticed this is in Uplifting News. So, let’s be optimistic. Maybe global capitalism will collapse and governments will start trying to take care of people.

Nobody said anything about ICE, we’re talking about the military known for bombing weddings in multiple middle eastern countries and then bombing ambulances when they respond.

If you have the money to commit atrocities in a dozen countries at once, you have money to spare.

That’s .world for you; complaining about Reddit while trying to recreate it exactly

It’s very sad to see hype like this. They only had 30 enrolled, this was just a safety study, and while the data looks promising, there is certainly not enough statistical power, which is why there is no approval yet.

Shame on the BBC. If you are going to quote invesigators, you should state that they have paid consultancy deals with UniQure. The same two people were equally excited about a Roche therapy years ago…

But UniCure stock went up 200% today, which is the point.

  • OpenStars@piefed.socialEnglish
    8·
    3 days ago

    True, and upvoted btw, but then all the more reason to remove comments and ultimately even ban people if need be (for repeated and/or more egregious offences), not out of any unfriendliness and rather our of a desire to fulfill the very intent of this community, even when people just passing by refuse to bother to read the rules.

    This is a sanctuary for those seeking a break from the incessant negativity and rage (e.g. schadenfreude) often found in today’s news cycle.

    If people are turned off by enforced positivity, they are welcome to block the community, but less welcomed to ignore the needs of any community that simply wants to exist in peace.

    Similarly there are women-only spaces, and LGBTQIA+ spaces, etc. where the needs of people just passing by are treated as being of considerably less value than those inside of it, who just want a moment to breathe without having to justify their existence to someone else who refuses to understand, or even someone who is legitimately “just asking questions”, but like… do that at another time, in some other place, you know?

    (I can’t see the report queue so am speaking entirely theoretically here and could be missing something from that context. We both seem to be in agreement that it is good to be kind, just differing on how to enact that i.e. who needs it more, in this space.)

    • 🇰 🌀 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 🇮 @pawb.socialEnglish
      7·
      3 days ago

      Enforcement is the bigger issue than the rule, too. Immediate removal/banishment is too heavy handed. I personally rather dislike how uncommon it is for a written warning to be given for a first time minor offense. A polite reminder of the rules (maybe as a pinned comment on bigger, active posts) is better than immediate mod action that generally also comes with zero communication. And if you do a removal, telling the user why goes a long way.

      Also good to keep in mind that there’s a lotta anarchists here on Lemmy and I can only assume they, like I do, don’t really like authority so even a simple and justified mod action can be perceived harsher here. Shit, just look at all the mod drama comms! 🤣

      In the end, I just want what everyone, users and mods, would agree is fair.

      • OpenStars@piefed.socialEnglish
        3·
        3 days ago

        Immediate banishment does sound fairly harsh, but I thought was not even under discussion. Immediate removal is another thing, which I perceive more neutrally. If the offence is egregious enough that the person flagrantly violating the rules is practically daring the mods to ban them (this does happen, OFTEN!) then I can definitely see scenarios where this is warranted. Otoh even a casual string of comments that are negatively oriented might rather be dealt with via a message (DM? public reply to one of the comments?) - it all depends on their severity, and on the maturity of the mods, and how resilient the community is. This community seeking to provide a safe haven… yeah, this one I could see immediate removal being far more common than usual.

        Of course, Lemmy does not notify anyone of comments being removed, so that’s another wrinkle in all of this. Someone finding out months to years later that some of their content was removed has a different feel to it than receiving a notification, especially if an explanation is offered along with that. Lemmy really is so primitive in so very many ways (though I don’t think that either PieFed or Mbin offer such notifications either, so this is more an issue affecting the entire Threadiverse), that what would be most ideal typically very much takes a backseat to what the tools will allow to be done.

        “Don’t comply in advance” is advice that I hear a lot these days. I really don’t think that a community called “Uplifting News” is going to end up in e.g. yepowertrippingbastards for daring to remove - gasp! - comments that contain strong negativity? If that is what the rules of the community asks for, then it is functioning as advertised, leaving people entirely free to either participate or not, and someone who does not even so much as bother to read the rules may feel put out, but should not really expect much sympathy from the Threadiverse community at large when it is they that violated the rules, and the mods who upheld exactly what they said (in advance!) they would do?

        Anarchy does not mean that there are never any rules anywhere, and in fact afaik quite the opposite in promoting for people to be more rather than less cognizant about their behavior and in particular how it affects others… even if only out of a selfish desire to not have any potential consequences wrap back around to affect themselves?