When I first joined this community I saw it as a respite from reddit where I was free to chill with people without being constantly expected to debate or defend arguments or anything. Just a forum where people are nice.
Lately though it seems every active comment section is filled to the brim with, to be frank, obnoxious people who want nothing more than to fight with you about everything you say. I think they’re known as “debate bros.”
I’m not saying debate shouldn’t be happening but to be honest it’s disappointing seeing it be the only thing occurring. I’ve tried contributing in other fashions but have been met multiple times with people trying to start arguments with me about things or get me to defend “points” that I didn’t make. This in particular has been very annoying. I’ve reported every instance of this due to it not contributing but I feel as if that’s not helping.
I like talking to people I disagree with. I like conversing with differing opinions. But I feel alone in that this isn’t the only thing I want to do on a forum.
Again, I’m not trying to definitively say we shouldn’t debate at all, but just pointing out how prevalent it seems to be. Id like to just converse with people without being expected to make and defend points. I feel like that’s a major thing we should’ve left on Reddit.
If people want to debate then they can do that. I just dislike that it appears to become the base-level expectation for the instance.
While I’m not a psychologist, I read far too much crap online, so take this as a layman’s view.
There’s been a lot of research around the dopamine feedback loop around social media, as well as the fact that arguing and “winning” is a major dopamine hit, so I wouldn’t be the least bit shocked that a lot of the more toxic people are literally addicted to the dopamine that social networks give you that they’re arguing and posting for no other reason than their next hit.
Oh no, they quite literally are. You pretty much nailed the root of it, and also brought up a good point as to why for profit social media tends to become so harmful. Engagement is prioritized, and “winning” and arguing with people drives engagement due to the dopamine hit. That’s why you will constantly see rage bait promoted across social media. It makes money.
I guess the real question, ultimately, is how do you deprogram the worst elements of this cohort so that they can like… respond and converse like a normal human without having to argue every single thing and go on and on and on until they “win”? (Which, IMO, means the other person has just gotten tired of dealing with them more than anything else.)
I will happily admit I have absolutely no idea, and will also admit that I have on more than one occasion been That Guy Posting but I really really try to not let myself be.
I think it’s a matter of being mindful of it, creating an environment where it isn’t acceptable, as well as making sure that the algorithms that tend to generate the most toxicity don’t get added in.
To add on I think it is also a thing of social norms. So if a plurality in a post starts being argumentative then it can become the default way others talk in other parts of the post.
So it sort of is an “Embody the change you want to see” thing.
Absolutely. I am not perfect whatsoever, no one is but I try my best personally to make lemmy a nice place and as a community it’s our collective responsibility to at the very least try
I haven’t been here that long, but the dopamine hits are a familiar mechanism underpinning most social media these days – something I try to do as someone who has a lot of strong opinions on stuff and am pre-disposed to debate is to still give out votes to replies that disagree with me, even strongly, as long as they are thoughtful and reasoned.
I do it because I think sometimes people can recognize that gesture and it helps them check their attitude if it is getting a bit too aggressive, it can sometimes interrupt the “debate me bro” circuit that social media so often tries to reinforce. You basically give them the dopamine reward without them feeling they have to reach that extreme end of the debate to get it from someone. But, more importantly, it’s also a small action that forces me to swallow my pride and ego a tiny bit. Clicking upvote on something you disagree with is an acknowledgement that your own ego has its flaws. It’s an exercise in maintaining perspective.
I used to be against discussion-oriented social media that doesn’t have a downvote, but going from Reddit to Beehaw has made me really appreciate how downvotes can only really feed toxicity outside some very specific use cases. On reddit you’d more often get downvotes with no response or explanation, even for innocuous comments or simply content you shared with people. Which is disheartening and makes you start to behave in a paranoid way.
The way people used the downvote was not to moderate content that added nothing to the discussion, but simply to try and shutdown ideas and content that they personally didn’t like, which is a subtle but consequential difference. Removing the downvote means that the way to deal with unwanted content is now to either confront it with words or, if you have no real justification or argument you are willing to get into, take no action.
Instead of using the upvote as an ‘agree’ button I use it now as more of an acknowledgement of the person’s perspective as valid and not intentionally disrespectful, even if I disagree. It helps me reel myself back in if I feel that pull to dig my heels in to an unproductive degree.