From my experience, it hasn't been the 'old guard' that's worried about that transformation you discussed, it's been users who are just getting their feet wet. I think everyone who is at all involved on the site goes through a 'I hope this doesn't become reddit 2.0' and that fear usually dissipates with time.
As someone that has had a front row seat to every one of these influxes, I can assure you that you are correct. It's nearly entirely the new wave that makes the predictions that Hubski will eventually decline etc, etc. Then, several weeks pass and it all subsides. -Good observation.
I wish I had another badge. This is very eloquent. My thoughts exactly.
My pleasure. I've been peeking at your blog as well. Bookmarked! Keep writing.
I tend to agree I think follow based schemes like pintrest instagram don't end up like reddit. Also politeness is cultural and I think we have a culture of thoughtfullness here. I am not myself thoughtful but I enjoy it in others.
I agree with your second to last paragraph. Hubski is going to find itself in the same boat that reddit is in, meaning, people don't think too much when using the up/down vote (in this case mute/ignore/hush). The entire Hubski system is predicated on people carefully considering when they choose to use these options. If reddit has taught us anything, it's that some people will, most people won't. I myself have already been muted because the user 'didn't like my tone'. I never insulted anyone, didn't attack a single person. I expressed my opinion in a tone the user didn't like (or so they say, who really knows). The other point is that there really isn't good discourse on Hubski. The 'culture of politeness', as you called it, doesn't really help with actual discourse, only the appearance of discourse. There's something to be said for being able to go at it in a discussion, provided neither party is openly attacking the other. These sorts of discussions cannot happen often on hubski (despite what a few will claim). They'll happen only when two people who have the proper restraint meet each other. The second one of them doesn't have the proper restraint, you have a potentially good discussion that's cut short. Hubski will devolve into something similar to reddit, just along different lines. Atleast on reddit I'm able to state my opinion without other users being able to simply click a link to shut me out of the entire discussion. For someone who actually values intellectual discourse, I'm here to tell you that hubski isn't what I look for. Reddit is more inline than hubski will ever be, for the reasons I layed out above. Reddit has it's issues, but atleast there you can be involved in actual discussions that don't involve both sides worrying about whether or not the other is simply going to remove their ability to be involved in the conversation.
For someone who can't spell "layed out" correctly, you can feel free to keep to reddit. Tell me this isn't good discourse. Or this or this? What is your definition of "good discourse"? Not to toot my own horn but you don't think this is a solid, intellectual discussion? In which case what the fuck are your parameters for good discourse? I see people disagreeing here. I see people presenting their opinions. I can find you that and more. It's easy. Considering I have already provided you some evidence to the contrary and can dig out more, give me some evidence that your statement is true. You know. Something that might mitigate what I've put forth. If Reddit is more to your tastes, then as I've told others: please - stay there. Also, it's "laid out," not "layed out." It's "its issues" not "it's." I don't think it's a common fear that someone will mute you just because you disagree with them on one point. "Mute" is not commonly used that way, especially as relationships build between users. there really isn't good discourse on Hubsk
There's something to be said for being able to go at it in a discussion, provided neither party is openly attacking the other. These sorts of discussions cannot happen often on hubski (despite what a few will claim).
_refugee_ tried to be passive aggressive and when it didn't result in the response he wanted he turned it into open aggression (and it still isn't going to result in the response he's looking for). He has every right to be a dick, just as I can choose not to respond to it. But I haven't muted him, nor will I, it hurts me every bit as much as him. He might actually have something constructive to say at some point.
What is amusing about this situation is that user seems to think that anyone who disagrees with someone else will immediately mute them instead of continuing the discussion at future points, and I have no intention of muting mreiland. What is even more amusing is that as that user has only submitted one post ever, muting me would have minimal effects anyway.
I used to mute people all of the time on Reddit if/when it was obvious that they were trolling/not being constructive, and advocated that others do the same (rather than engage them, which it seems they always did.) Unsurprisingly, that never caught on - people enjoy "engaging the troll" or arguing hardheadedly too much to consider their time spent wasted.
Conversely, I have come across users in the past that had contrasting views from mine, but that obviously cared enough about "the thing" they were talking about that they were able to present clear arguments illuminating their reasoning. I chose not to block these people, and regardless of whether I agreed or disagreed with them, our conversations were always constructive.
I guess my point is, some discussions are worth continuing, others are not. I look forward to seeing if the ability to mute here makes "muting the noise" in pursuit of meaningful discussion a more standard practice.
How are you zedadex? Nice to make your acquaintance. You have been a member of Hubski for 955 DAYS! and this is your first comment, that's amazing. I hope we hear more from you. Please let us know if the muting process helps you to filter out the noise. Cheers!
Another thought - it's kind of conversation derailing to focus on that (grammar). It doesn't really add anything to the conversation/s. It just seems like a passive aggressive form of trolling or dismissing any points that the person was trying to make. However, instead of trying to talk myself out of this site, I'm staying. Just tossing my two cents around this thread.
Why ya throwing chiterlings on folks. I don't think hubski has to be defended I think like Pintrest the tone will remain hubskish. It will fragment before it will go reddit.
Can you expand on why they cannot? That's a damning statement. I've seen discussions where politeness has been abandoned in lieu of point defense. Politeness is a form of restraint. I'm also concerned that your post is predicated on the actions of a single person in a single episode. In my experience, the persons here aren't the type to shut you out because of your tone unless it's needlessly coarse, aggressive, demeaning, and riddled with ad hominems.These sorts of discussions cannot happen often on hubski (despite what a few will claim).
For the same reason reddit became what it became. No matter how hard anyone on reddit tries, people are going to continue using up/downvotes to roughly mean "like/dislike" or "agree/disagree". ignore/mute/hush are a hell of a lot more powerful than a single like/dislike, and people are going to use them to simply mean "I don't want to hear your opinion anymore". And they already do. The reason those of you who have been here longer don't experience it to the level that the new people do is simply because you're dealing with people you're familiar with, and those people are less likely to mute you for your opinion than someone they are unfamiliar with. That's just how people work, but it's not an environment where a lot of good discussion can take place. As much as people complain about reddit, I've experienced more blatant censorship of my thoughts on this site than I ever have on reddit.
I do think the way mute functions has the potential to hurt discourse. We should not create functionality that allows one person to prevent someone from participating with everyone else. I think this is an attempt at passive moderation, and it will probably hurt the site. Not in a major way to the core group of Hubski (of which I don't include myself), but in a meaningful way. I have a feeling that it will eventually be changed or removed, but maybe not for another few influxes. But on the whole, I don't think it's going to prevent good discussion from taking place. If someone doesn't care for what you have to say, they're going to disregard you whether or not they have the site do it for them. I think you're right about the familiarity -- because of the way hubski interacts with itself, someone who does not come here with the social pleasantries of meeting someone for the first time is prone to be muted. I doubt this will be a permanent state as growth continues, and I don't think it dooms us to becoming reddit. Aside from mute, these things are less about Hubski and more about people. I don't think it's possible to create a website that forces good discussion by design. The key element to making it happen is the community, which is why the people here are generally on the defensive toward newcomers. But what's great about hubski is that they're dead set on trying to make it a reality. Even though you've had a relatively poor experience so far, the staff are willing to listen and consider the issues you bring up. I think you know it and that's why you're still here, as opposed to the majority of the reddit influx you came with.
It's also much harder to ingratiate yourself with people if they're too busy muting you and shutting you out of conversations, it's happened to me a few times already. So it sounds like it's a closed off community where the "new people" (like myself, a refugee from Reddit) are stuck wondering what the hell is going on when we can no longer reply or even interact with someone. Although I haven't had any experience with your very last point regarding censorship....
Also, the amount of "muting and ignoring" that is said to occur vs. what actually occurs is different. There are many people that never get muted/ignored -the VAST majority. If you're someone that does get muted/ignored often, perhaps the system is working and Hubski isn't for you. -Not saying this about you, I've enjoyed talking w you, but for those that are angry that they've been "censored," perhaps the community at large is telling them something? Perhaps the system is working perfectly for Hubski, just not for them. It's not for everybody. Edit: also, fwiw I too find it silly when people point out spelling/grammar errors in a debate or argument. But then, I have horrible spelling and grammar :)It's also much harder to ingratiate yourself with people if they're too busy muting you and shutting you out of conversations, it's happened to me a few times already. So it sounds like it's a closed off community
as someone that (I believe) personally welcomed you and has enjoyed some conversations with you, I'm curious if you can point me towards the places where you are being shut out of conversations. -not saying you weren't, it's just a curiosity. Thanks.
Yeah you did personally welcome me, and I appreciate that very much - conversations with you are always entertaining, how are you doing these days by the way? I'd buy you a beer but I don't know if you're anywhere near me... East Coast is all I'll say. You would know these things, and the "mutes" I was referring to were just one post like 7 or 8 days ago. So I don't remember exactly where it happened - I just saw it on my notifications one afternoon where was like so and so replied to your post and as I went to hit reply, it said "muted". Anyway I was just blowing smoke (something I seem good at these days).
I am good, thanks. I live in Chapel Hill NC and if you are in the neighborhood, beers would certainly be in order.
I live in the Tidewater region of Virginia so if you're ever up that way, PM me and we'll see if we can meet up around the beach or something at one of the bars on the strip or something. I mean sheez you're a lot closer to me than I thought. Google says ~3.5 hours.
Pm me who muted you I will take them out ;) Not like a date like the mafia.
Well the thing is, I don't remember who or why at this point I just thought it was kind of interesting. I had mentioned something re; the whole ignore/mute system to insomniasex 2 or 3 days into my being here (about a day after it happened) and it was explained pretty much the same way we're discussing it here. Something something beating a dead horse with a new user who's working out the kinks in his experience.
Maybe subconsciously but not that I can think of.
The quote is gone? From your mind? Dissatisfaction I was hoping I remembered something.
I've thought about your complaints about Hubski. Politeness can be an obstacle to meaningful discussion, but, on balance, I think rudeness is probably a worse one. Oddly enough, I like your tone -- I think. Part of the problem with discussion sites in general is the same problem I have noticed in email. The tone is very much up to the emotional state of the reader. Things that ought not to be heated arguments easily get that way because one of the parties is just especially paranoid that day. Not that some things aren't worth heated arguments. I have thought too, as white alluded to below, that maybe the casual muter is not worth worrying about anyway. Though it is hard not to. We're probably hardwired that way.
A lot of this has sprung up because of the conversation about auto-ignoring anyone who has been on the site less than X days. The muting is the worst part of it, but it's all a part of a bigger issue. Also a big part of the disconnect is, again, people who have been here longer don't get treated the same way. You're a lot less likely to get muted for an opinion if you're here for a while. The idealism that is Hubski assumes people are going to consider people based upon their behavior, but that isn't really what happens. Your comment about my tone. I tend towards blunt observations. I don't insult people, ad hominems are not something I have a tendency to do, and I certainly don't treat people like they're less. But if I have an opinion, I'm going to tell you what that opinion is. If I think your thought process is flawed, I'm going to point that out as well. If I think you're approaching something in a way that can be improved, I'll say something to that effect. It isn't an attack, it's simply my opinion. This is exactly what I did to one person who muted me. I pointed out that racism is a challenge to work through, and not an excuse for failing. When racism is the most important thing in your life, all challenges become racism, and it stops being your fault you failed (I myself am an older minority). I not only got muted for that opinion, I got locked out of the entire conversation for it. That shouldn't happen, and Hubski is less for it.
Exactly! There are some privileged members of the old guard, in part because of the way the site is constructed. If you want your posts to be seen, it pays to cultivate the favor of people with huge followings. Some of the elders are very decent people. Some of them are narrow-minded egotists. Why should this be any different from the rest of world? Maybe it should -- but it isn't. I still think you overreached a little in your rhetoric, but you did hit a nerve. You have, it appears, the same view of racism that I have. I find that very refreshing. It both amuses me and disgusts me that, by some people's standards, I'm probably a racist. In other words, I don't think "that offends me!" - constitutes a knockdown argument. If a person dislikes your genetics, they're a racist. If they don't want to surrender to your culture -- that is quite another matter. I think we share common minority status -- we're skeptics.
I said before that removing "dig/bury & upvote/downvote" aspect is what I like a lot. If a comment was well thought out, you can like it, if not just leave it alone. I think that in itself will stop the reaction gif, meme, 9gag type stuff.
I'm afraid that Hubski won't scale well enough to handle users that would "share" that sort of thing, though. Someone posts a meme or a pun that doesn't contribute to the conversation, 8 other people come "share" it, and boom, it's a top comment of a comment page. Repeat as necessary. Hubski doesn't really have anything to counter that, does it? Besides "ignore", which isn't ideal for one off-hand comment.
This is a valid concern and is one we think about. Currently, you can "hush" a user which filters their comments to the bottom of the comment thread. It's a start. But here lies the challenge, we can give all the tools you need to customize your experience and on the flipside they'll be 10 people telling us how it's going to end up creating an echo chamber and will censor people etc etc
Someone should start a meme tag and see if a memestastic hubski could exist ignored by cool folks.
I would like to point out that the ignore feature isn't inherently negative and has nothing whatever to do with censorship. Your feed is a list. Ignore keeps things out of it. If I, say, wanted to buy a used car, but I dislike red cars. I can go to a used car website, and ask it to filter out all of the red cars of the make and model in which I'm interested. There's nothing wrong with red; it's just not my taste. That's ignore. It's a way to build a feed. "I'm interested in such-and-such. I'm uninterested in thus-and-so. Show me everything in between." No one should feel bad ignoring another user, and no one should feel bad should it come to their attention that they happen to be ignored. Hell, I post from NYT all the time. Probably a lot of people find that annoying. Ignore me then. No big deal. No censorship.
I never said it WAS censorship. There are several definitions of censorship, but they all have one salient feature in common – a party C who keeps party A from communicating something to party B. “Ignore” does not fit this pattern. Hubski does not censor. (As far as I know, it doesn’t torture either…) I didn’t say “ignore” was a form of censorship – I said it was incompatible with my particular ethical standards. If I don’t follow a particular tag, I am exercising my disinterest in a topic or category of topics. If, on the other hand, I choose to “ignore” an individual I am effectively deciding that I don’t want to hear what that person has to say on any topic whatsoever. If I disagree with them on one topic – abracadabra! – they are banished from my universe. The loss, I think, is on the side of the person doing the banishing. I am not advocating for the policy’s repeal – I am simply saying that using “ignore” would violate my own particular standards. Even if the feed is choked with trivialities, that itself tells me something I would not know if I chose to confine myself to a handful of friends and narrow interests. You may, of course, do what you want. It’s a free… well, uh, abstract chunk of cyberspace.
Recently b_b mentioned to the rest of the Hubski team that he thought the term "ignore" wasn't appropriate because of the negative connotation. I tend to agree, it should be called something else, because it isn't a negative thing at all. I would be SHOCKED if I wasn't ignored by at least several people given the amount of music (original and otherwise) that I post to Hubski. I take absolutely no offense to this. All this said, I am pretty frugal in my ignoring ways. I tend to keep the ignoring for tags/domains and obvious spammers. I have muted maybe 2 people that weren't obvious spammer, they were just obvious assholes. FWIW, I really enjoyed your observations, thank you for taking the time to write this. I don't expect that everyone that visits/uses Hubski will develop the same types of relationships, but many will. I also think that with time and expansion of our user base, we will see a number of different communities. There will definitely be bubbles of different communities throughout Hubski, just as there are IRL. We have some interesting ideas in the works right now. I'm excited for the future and I'm glad that you are a part of our "community" emcadwaladr! -We are better for it imo.If I don’t follow a particular tag, I am exercising my disinterest in a topic or category of topics. If, on the other hand, I choose to “ignore” an individual I am effectively deciding that I don’t want to hear what that person has to say on any topic whatsoever.
This isn't so. It simply means that their posts will not make it in to your feed. They can still comment on your posts and you can still seek out their content, should you so desire but it will no longer be in your feed etc. The danger of letting people build protective walls around themselves is that they will be tempted to do just that. Every time I hear the phrase “Hubski community” I mentally shake my head. To me, a community is a group of people with tangible interdependencies. Whether they like each other or not, they have to get along. I have seen a certain level of emotional support offered up on Hubski from time to time, but if my car dies on the interstate I will probably not be logging in and begging members for immediate help.
-I feel a sense of community on Hubski that I have rarely felt IRL or online. While I cannot call lil to come help me if I have a flat tire, it's due to proximity and not digitality(I made up a word). Same goes for ButterflyEffect, b_b, flagamuffin, _refugee_, steve, theadvancedapes, humanodon, insomniasexx and others that I have befriended on the site but otherwise would have never met. I'd gladly help them in a bind and I'd like to think they'd reciprocate should I need help when my car dies on the interstate.
I can certainly attest to that. Also, you are such a wonderful "long distance" pal that I wouldn't be surprised if you called AAA and had them come pick me up. (do they have AAA in Canada?)I can pump up a deflated ego if necessary.
I'm honoured (note the Canadian spelling) to be your story. Of course I had to look up head canon. It seems to mean a story that explodes in your head, but doesn't exist elsewhere. Is that it?
Yes, except mine does exist elsewhere. Deep, deep within the dusty pages of a Scivener tomb, one can find a file. In that file, a story transcending the internet, fantasy, and the love hub, is being written. Prepare yourselves. HUBSKI. Coming...whenever I finish it. Maybe I'll just do regular updates. But it's actually happening! The cat's out of the bag.
THIS IS AWESOME NEWS. "Love Hub?" Nice... edit: I feel bad for this thread, we've really hi-jacked it. lil, would it bother you if something like this occurred on your blog?
Oh, I caught the reference immediately. I'm also a fan of the sticker.
Before you go and rewrite it, you should know that she splits her time between Canada and the USofA -(florida is still the US, right?)
I'm late to this party (as I often find is the case these days) but my 2 cents is that I really feel like a lot of the reactions we've had to the "ignore" feature is unwarranted. It's like when I meet someone who I can tell is really eager to be friends, even though we just met. It makes me wary and suspicious. When I was new here I didn't expect anyone to give my comments any weight and so I started participating in stuff and before long I met people who are also interested in writing and music and art and that I suddenly was forming relationships with users, not usernames. I now have two pen pals (well, e-vox pals) and various other people I communicate with outside of "the public" such as it is on hubski. I've asked for advice on things, earnestly and I've gotten honest advice back. Hell, some of you guys have even tried to help me find work. Social dynamics are nerve-wracking in face to face situations and for a lot of people it lends itself toward an "I don't give a fuck" kind of attitude. That's fine, but not giving a fuck about what other people think also means not giving a fuck about how one's own presence affects others, which at the end of the day does not lend itself to building relationships. Hubski. Sit down and give a fuck: hubski might just start to give a fuck back.
lil, please add this to the Hubski slogans, it's amazing. Humanodon, I always look forward to your comments/posts on the site and I look forward to the drinks and discussions that we will undoubtedly have IRL someday.Hubski. Sit down and give a fuck: hubski might just start to give a fuck back.
I just made you and humanodon editors of the amazing slogan list so perhaps one of you can add it. I added eightbitsamurai as well because the last one tng suggested was by 8bit: "8 out of 10/would hubski again"
and a reminder to tng to mention to the team kb's suggestion: by kleinbl00 78 days ago · link · save · +!
You know, you ought to start a rotating list of these slogans that pops up on the "about" page or something.
Dude, I'm literally about to sit down in the studio and try to create something. If you have any words, even one line... PM me. Actually, preferably no more than 4 lines, so long as you don't mind me treating them like clay.
Thanks for the clarification on “ignore” – though I still stand on the principle if not on the detail. When human beings devise rules to regulate behavior there are almost always benefits, drawbacks, and unintended consequences – good and bad. “Ignore” is just such a rule. I should admit, too, that my viewing habits are so chaotic that fine-tuning my feed isn’t even a concern. I was probably a little harsh to b_b. If so, I apologize. With regard to the community idea – I’m not knocking what you have. There are some very interesting and likable people on here and I, too, care about them. It is just that the reality of online associations is that you can easily adopt quiet a low threshold of tolerance and get by with it. If a coworker says something really irritating – I can’t just mute him. Here, one can. This is a source of ongoing mild anxiety for me, as I take all sorts of positions that I know are liable to irritate people – not for the purpose of irritating them but because I believe the ideas are valid. If someone says “bad idea -- here’s why…” Bravo! A rational discourse is born! If they think “I don’t like this idea and don’t care to discuss it,” that’s ok too. At least they haven’t closed the door. If, on the other hand, they think “e.m.c. believes X so he’s an idiot I’m going to ignore,” yeah, that bothers me. We live in a world in which that happens all too often. Personally, I know many decent and worthwhile people who entertain what I think are some pretty weak ideas. They don’t merit my contempt because I think that they are wrong. On the other hand, I shouldn’t whine about the consequences of being me. I like a phrase wasoxygen used once. “The Hubski ecosystem.” That feels more accurate to me personally. You are wedded to the “c” word and maybe I shouldn’t quibble about that either. Hubski is, after all, one of my favorite pieces of illusory space and I look forward to posting and commenting until they come and take me away.
People who are open to ideas will remain so. Someone who wants to remain ignorant of what other people have to say aren't going to change just because they don't have the option of ignoring or muting. Removing the other protective utilities of ignore/mute just for them is not a great choice, in my opinion.If a coworker says something really irritating – I can’t just mute him. Here, one can. This is a source of ongoing mild anxiety for me, as I take all sorts of positions that I know are liable to irritate people – not for the purpose of irritating them but because I believe the ideas are valid. If someone says “bad idea -- here’s why…” Bravo! A rational discourse is born! If they think “I don’t like this idea and don’t care to discuss it,” that’s ok too. At least they haven’t closed the door. If, on the other hand, they think “e.m.c. believes X so he’s an idiot I’m going to ignore,” yeah, that bothers me.
Pretty much how I feel about it.With regard to the community idea – I’m not knocking what you have. There are some very interesting and likable people on here and I, too, care about them. It is just that the reality of online associations is that you can easily adopt quiet a low threshold of tolerance and get by with it. If a coworker says something really irritating – I can’t just mute him. Here, one can. This is a source of ongoing mild anxiety for me, as I take all sorts of positions that I know are liable to irritate people – not for the purpose of irritating them but because I believe the ideas are valid. If someone says “bad idea -- here’s why…” Bravo! A rational discourse is born! If they think “I don’t like this idea and don’t care to discuss it,” that’s ok too. At least they haven’t closed the door. If, on the other hand, they think “e.m.c. believes X so he’s an idiot I’m going to ignore,” yeah, that bothers me. We live in a world in which that happens all too often. Personally, I know many decent and worthwhile people who entertain what I think are some pretty weak ideas. They don’t merit my contempt because I think that they are wrong. On the other hand, I shouldn’t whine about the consequences of being me.
Yup, Twitter and Tumblr and Hubski all have this in common, and as the userbase increases that feeling will increase as well. I didn't even see this post until I clicked the Global tag, which I feel is sorta like the "trending tag" on Twitter -- btw mk, may I ask how Global works? Don't want to give an improper representation. I didn't see the value in Twitter until I started following tags such as technology and gaming and programming, etc. Then I found other people who have my interest, and had my own little Twitter bubble. Referenced it as a cocktail party during a presentation I had.
Global is everything that isn't pulled into your feed by following or shares, excluding anything that you ignore. Globally-ignored users won't be seen there unless you toggle on 'show-global-ignored' in your settings. But, there are few of those, so the experience will be pretty much the same. BTW, I enjoyed the post emcadwaladr. I am purposefully holding off before adding my 2 cents.
Why is it one person's right to defend sexism/racism/flat earthism but it's not my right to ignore them? Are they _really_ going to give me a new perspective? Are they _really_ going to find an argument that I haven't read? I don't believe in censorship by third parties, but I believe what I put into my eyes and ears should be my choice. People can be rude, or offensive, or even abusive.As a dedicated advocate of free speech, I was initially rather put off by the right to mute. I think that if someone wants to argue anything – even that the world is flat – it does us more harm to shut them up than it does to go through the minor tedium of refuting them.
I see no ethical justification for ignoring people – but I understand that this is my standard and not necessarily everyone else’s.
You have a right to, you just pay a price for exercising that right. You don't know that there isn't at least something valuable in their argument, and you also don't know there isn't something valuable they have to say on an unrelated topic.
There's a difference between "mute" and "ignore". If I muted you, you wouldn't be able to reply to anything I've posted (including entire link posts). If I ignored you, I simply wouldn't see your posts. (Someone correct me if I'm wrong, I haven't actually used either one of these functions yet.) I think that ignore is a very useful tool to have, while mute is rather harsh and unnecessary.
I don't have a problem with either of these, why should an abusive person be able to reply to my posts? Why should one person be only given the power to ignore, while another person still has the power to follow someone around and reply? If this is between me and another party, what is the harm? Nobody is deciding for me, and I can make decisions based on my own experiences on what I want to see, sounds like a win-win.There's a difference between "mute" and "ignore". If I muted you, you wouldn't be able to reply to anything I've posted (including entire link posts). If I ignored you, I simply wouldn't see your posts. (Someone correct me if I'm wrong, I haven't actually used either one of these functions yet.)
While I agree with your argument, I think "mute" has too much of an opportunity to be abused. You are effectively censoring a viewpoint from everyone else when you mute. Let's say I post something controversial, and simply mute everyone who disagrees with me. Now, the conversation looks completely one-sided. Clearly if it's an abusive individual who just follows you around Hubski and calls you dumb whenever you post, it's a useful tool. I still think it would be better if you just ignored that person rather than muted them in this case, too, however.
Is the mute global or is it just limited to that one person? Say you muted me, does that mean someone like swedishbadgergirl wouldn't be able to see my posts anywhere on-site?
I agree that this is a danger. However, I would argue that giving each user the ability to avoid other users is a critical component of civil discourse. If (as in meatspace), you know that I can choose not to interact with you, then it signals that when I do, I have made a conscious choice to do so; I give you my attention, and thus, there is the groundwork for an expectation of mutual respect. While the MSM tends to consider the counter to every opinion to be worthwhile by the mere fact that it has been voiced, intellectually honest discussions place a heavier burden on all parties. Just as dangerous as an echo chamber, is a chamber filled with opinions that will not be changed. The magic of intellectually honest discussion is that your mind can come out different than when it entered. IMHO when we speak of honest discourse, we often focus so much on the rights of the speaker, that we overlook those of the listener. A honest exchange happens when both parties risk something to make it happen. Thoughtful people want their opinions to be considered, not only heard. Thus, we don't provide these functions for intellectual comfort, but to support mutually-established foundations which are requisite for intellectual exchange. Once again, thanks for this piece.The danger of letting people build protective walls around themselves is that they will be tempted to do just that.
I am pleased that we seem to share a common view about the value of rational discussion – when all goes well, both parties move a little closer to the truth. We may have somewhat different perspectives because we probably see and use Hubski somewhat differently. You talk about the “speaker” and the “listener”; I think in terms of the “writer” and the “reader”. These are not synonymous relationships. You see Hubski as a verbal discussion; I see it as an eclectic magazine with a large number of contributors, most of whom are aspiring critics. Using the metaphor of Hubski as a bar, I would sit quietly in a corner booth drinking whatever drink I hadn’t tried before, typing out an essay – possibly about the social dynamics of the bar itself. I don’t care very much about being cut out of discussions because the discussions are just an incidental perk of the environment to me. I do get irritated, though, when people delete my very existence from their universe. I like the place, and can live with this impertinence – but it will never fail to irk me. It has occurred to me that mute/ignore (hush is merely ignore with ethical pretentions) has a benefit I hadn’t thought of. Most of the noxious people who would shriek ad hominem on Reddit (typically in the form of calling people trolls who simply disagree) will probably use the mute/ignore instead. Thus, it could be that the conversation is being kept civil, at least in part, by the fact that people who can’t handle disagreement don’t have too. I suppose I have already beaten around the edges of this idea in my essay. While I have reservations about the system, I don’t have any better suggestions. I admit that it works reasonably well, most of the time. If I think of any better ideas, I’ll try to sober up from whatever toxic absinthe you and your thenewgreen barkeep have served me, and if the idea still looks good in the cold light of day – I’ll let you know! Always enjoyable. Move my typewriter to the back room if you need the booth. See you next time. Cheers. - e.m.
I post my own content, so I can use Google analytics to monitor my traffic volume in all it's lurid detail. Hmm... mk, would it be possible to post a view count for the benefit of people with kuracisto's concern? I don''t see how this would violate anyone's privacy, and it would let people know if they are talking to the wall.