TbilisiHodl on Nostr: Personally, I think it may be hopeless. The very act of communicating in an online ...
Personally, I think it may be hopeless. The very act of communicating in an online public space introduces competition dynamics that, once underway, cannot be undone.
1) Verbal communication is prone to easy misinterpretation and projection (e.g. assuming a poster is angry, intentionally dumb, etc.).
2) Once sufficiently comfortable with a platform, many or most people begin to “relax and be themselves,” sharing opinions and sentiments they would normally reserve for friends in real life. Being yourself feels good, it attracts like-minded people, but also introduces conflicts of personality and taste. This also happens with offline groups, but there it is easier to separate yourself from those with different tastes and sentiments.
3) Once personal likes and dislikes (friends and enemies) have been established, they tend to become self-reinforcing. Fighting one’s enemies feels rewarding, etc. In offline societies, this same mechanism ensures ongoing competition for power and resources.
Social platforms that don’t have this dynamic (yet) are typically:
- subject-matter focused (an implicit agreement to not “relax and be yourself”) —> these are always the best, in my opinion!
OR
- a tight-knit but unrepresentative group that can be themselves without inflaming others, since the others simply aren’t on the platform
If I’m correct, the basic mechanism of “needless online conflict and outrage” isn’t the specific algorithms applied, but rather a biological feature of human psychology.
1) Verbal communication is prone to easy misinterpretation and projection (e.g. assuming a poster is angry, intentionally dumb, etc.).
2) Once sufficiently comfortable with a platform, many or most people begin to “relax and be themselves,” sharing opinions and sentiments they would normally reserve for friends in real life. Being yourself feels good, it attracts like-minded people, but also introduces conflicts of personality and taste. This also happens with offline groups, but there it is easier to separate yourself from those with different tastes and sentiments.
3) Once personal likes and dislikes (friends and enemies) have been established, they tend to become self-reinforcing. Fighting one’s enemies feels rewarding, etc. In offline societies, this same mechanism ensures ongoing competition for power and resources.
Social platforms that don’t have this dynamic (yet) are typically:
- subject-matter focused (an implicit agreement to not “relax and be yourself”) —> these are always the best, in my opinion!
OR
- a tight-knit but unrepresentative group that can be themselves without inflaming others, since the others simply aren’t on the platform
If I’m correct, the basic mechanism of “needless online conflict and outrage” isn’t the specific algorithms applied, but rather a biological feature of human psychology.