Lemmy’s design is focused on quality content by ditching the Karma farmers and addicts. No more chasing upvotes—people here actually focus on real value instead of feeding the ego.
Lemmy’s design is focused on quality content by ditching the Karma farmers and addicts. No more chasing upvotes—people here actually focus on real value instead of feeding the ego.
I think the only way to really fix this is to make votes a limited asset that accounts have. There are forums where this has worked okay: bodybuilding.com forums has a reputation system where accounts are limited in what they can give to other voters.
As long as “karma” is unlimited it suffers from the same problems whether you count it in aggregate or not. As some other commenters have said, people still seek validation in individual comments. I know because I do too.
Seeking validation apparently is core human trait so I am not sure if it is possible to avoid it at all. Still as you probably know social media corporations keep us hooked to their crack using it and amplifying the base value
Funnily, ironically some Lemmy apps copy Reddit UX (that was designed by psychology experts) and thus make it more addictive than it is on the web app.
Best bet to avoid social candy crack is to use lemmy from terminal if that is possible, or default site
I would imagine if you made karma points limited on the spender side rather than unlimited, then it might make users “try harder” to get validation, thus improving the quality of content on average.
Or it all could be bullshit and fail. Hard to say. You are right though, it’s all manufactured for engagement.
The problem I think is that users do not distribute votes based on “quality” but by how much they like the content. Which is only the same in some people
It’s the same as with democracy, in theory we should elect quality politicians but we elect those we like
But hey this is long clear I guess since the implementation of Reddit decade ago