If you dont agree with me you love shills and reddit
Does that pass as a legitimate argument?
"Let shills run the platform"
Is that your argument?
No it isnt. I gave you several reasons why the current implementation is not better for thwarting bad actors.
A shill is a paid agent trying to hock something like a website. Is that what you mean? If you mean a bad actor like a troll or a brigader, be specific.
The reason is simple. Bad actors have less time to disagree. Forcing people to engage drowns out shills and limits their influence significantly.
Keep an eye on it, sure. Give it time and then tell me I'm wrong.
If 100% of people voted, stealing an election wouldn't be possible.
If 100% of people speak up, the shill noise reveals itself.
A community that can encourage less lurkers has an extreme advantage when it comes to free speech.
False. You gave a theory, but you fail to recognize the effectiveness of allowing everyone to immediately identify bad actors.
You are wrong. Get over it.
(post is archived)