• ORbituary@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    15 hours ago

    There are no (edit)engagement algorithms here. Engagement should encourage conversation on the topic, not the behaviors of the poster.

    Both self-censorship and “engagement” mentality come from the same diseased source: corporate social media.

    • ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      17 hours ago

      The ‘Hot’ and ‘Active’ sorting options on your homepage is a primitive sorting algorithm, explained further in the lemmy docs themselves:

      A recent post with more comments will rank higher when using the ‘Active’ sorting method, hence why self-censored posts, which encourage people to call out the self-censoring as unnecessary (which I agree with) likely boost the self-censored post higher than it would’ve gotten without the censoring.

      • ORbituary@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        17 hours ago

        Just like with the other person I said this to: There are no algorithms that shadow-drop the topic like on other platforms. You knew exactly what I meant when I typed it, but chose a different path.

        • ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          16 hours ago

          I’m not saying that lemmy’s algorithm is at all similar to mainstream social media’s dark patterns and addictive algorithms.

          Lemmy’s use of a simple algorithm is necessary for this site to function at all (sorting newer posts from older posts is itself an algorithm), and does not imply that something nefarious is afoot. But it does use, by definition, an algorithm.

          To state there are no algorithms is objectively false.

          My observation is that the posts that self-censor happen to (likely not even intentionally) boost the popularity of said censored post due to the increased amount of comments against the self-censoring, as a result of the simple (non-addictive and non-exploitative) nature of Lemmy’s sorting algorithm.

          Take note that so far, this post has received 12 comments in a short time just regarding the censoring, rocketing it up to be seen by more people, some of which will add their own thoughts on the censoring, and perpetuate its increased ranking in the feed.

    • Denjin@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      16 hours ago

      An algorithm is just a defined procedure to apply to a given set of inputs to give a set of outputs. Technically sorting by new is applying an algorithm to the posts, just one with a single step. Something like hot or scaled do take into account number of comments and views.

      • ORbituary@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        17 hours ago

        There are no algorithms that shadow-drop the topic like on other platforms. You knew exactly what I meant when I typed it, but chose a different path.

        • village604@adultswim.fan
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          17 hours ago

          Yes, I knew exactly what you meant which is why I challenged it.

          What they were describing is a part of the Lemmy algorithm. Posts with more engagement get higher spots on the Active and Hot sort orders.

          What you said was basically a strawman.