I treat social media as pure discussion platform to advance understanding or to know new stuff.
There had been something on my mind lately which I wanted to discuss as a way to improve the upvotes relevance to the quality of the post and the amount of discussion.
Let’s apply quality control on upvotes, so any post can get only 20 upvotes till it gets a specific amount of comments then the limit could be pumped up to 40 upvotes till it gets more comments, etc…
Why I am bringing this up, you might ask? The linked post by me is the peek proof of my point.
It’s pretty clear no one read the linked article and despite that, the post is the top post in the technology community. There is no comments discussing directly the story and from the face of it, There does not seem to be any indicator that any one benefited from this.
I skimmed over the story and shared it in the hopes to basically learn new stuff, get relevant recommendations or basically read some direct discussions.
In any way, I think my described system to handle upvotes would highly improve Lemmy, taking into consideration that numbers used are only for demonstration and the used numbers will need to be figured out separately.
Should this system be implemented into Lemmy?
I read an article the other day about the woman who wrote that tell all book about Meta. Supposedly (according to the article) she faces a $50K fine every time she breaks the contract she agreed to when departing the company by defaming them. But she has not ever been charged that fine. But she is facing bankruptcy.
That’s an article that’s so poorly written that it literally doesn’t seem to have warranted any comment except mine which says literally “I do not understand the facts presented in this article and how they correlate”. Last I checked there were no other comments.
We see articles like this all the time.