I got permabanned from /r/askhistorians for posting a link to reveddit, a site where you could view deleted posts. I did that to inform people that they could use that site to see all the posts that the mods remove (in that subreddit they remove any post that does not provide references).

I thought that the worst case would be that my post would get deleted and I would get a warning. No, they just permabanned me.

I was mad so I appealed telling them that it’s wrong to permaban people for reasons like this. I understand permaban for offensive content. But I still don’t understand their action.

Discussing with them proved that while one of them one reasonable and understanding, the other was completely mad about my action and wanted me to be almost on my knees pleading to remove the permaban. Eventually they “did a vote” and I stayed permabanned. I tried again one year later to no avail - I figured, maybe one year later they would get over it. Nope.

I just stopped checking and recommending /r/askhistorians ever since.

At least you are going to the dentist. My uncle was not brushing his teeth. And never to the dentist. Eventually they had to remove all of his teeth because it was all infected and it was too unbearable for him.

I had a depression period of my life where I was doing the worst possible treatment to my teeth - was eating a lot of sugar and would skip brushing here and there; also I was not brushing effectively. My teeth are not in very good condition right now. I wish I had kept a good mouth hygiene even when I was depressed.

Negativity. It’s ok to criticize, but there was something about Reddit that encouraged people to bash each others until one side wins instead of agreeing to disagree and move on.

I don’t want them making money out of the content I voluntarily and freely created. I was contributing in subs like C_programming to help newcomers. I have been thinking that all these posts I made will help the next AI - and Reddit (not me) will get paid for it.

So I mass edited each post and comment I made. They won’t get away with my data. My data belongs to me, not them.

Larger instances will either have more donators or close their subscriptions if it really is unsustainable.

The more Lemmy grows, the more instances will show up, which will help spread the load.

You speak of sustainability but Lemmy survived the wave of incoming Redditors without much downtime. It’s really impressive that this growth could happen. That’s the power of decentralized systems: they scale!

Reddit broke my trust. No way I’m going back there unless a major change occurs such as the CEO leaving to make place for a new one who is not as profit driven. But no way that’s gonna happen

Some people want to only recruit people that are less skilled by them so that they can remain in their position of power.

If you have a company with a few like that and several layers of recruitment I guess you can have a bunch of incompetent people spending their time in pointless meetings and not getting much done

I think having no reputation point is a good thing, it gives no incentive to post low-effort content just to get reputation points.

One key difference I found is the lack of user karma. You have no incentive to post something “just to get karma” because there is no global karma on your profile.

This encourages to post what you want to post instead of posting something that someone posted years ago because it’s easy free karma

The changes include no longer requiring users to do basic research and lowering the standard for what the subreddit counts as spam.

I bet this is to fight against mass edit tools. I actually used one to edit all the comments I ever wrote. Got flagged seconds after by the subreddit of Fear The Walking Dead, permabanning me for spam.

Personally I don’t care. At least now they don’t have my data anymore.

I am comparing a drug to a drug that’s the whole point. Phones are drugs. For adults and children alike.

The problem is not in the phone itself. It’s in the lack of doing things that kids should normally be doing at that age. They will play with their phone instead of playing physically (less tonus), sleeping (constant tiredness), talking with their parents (learning) or other kids (socializing).

I know kids like that in my family. You can tell from the dark lines under their eyes that they spend most of their day staring at a screen. And if you ask them to play outside they just don’t know what to do, they need access to a screen even with other kids. It’s really a scary sight. And its a drug yes

I’m all in to get programming classes where children learn to code on PCs. That’s a high pass for me. But AFAIK children aren’t doing programming on their phones.

In general i doubt using a phone at school is going to help them program or teach them about technology. They have plenty of time to explore phones on their own when they get home, especially now that kids don’t go much outside anymore. It’s not like a school ban would be cutting that away from them.

We can all agree that alcohol isn’t bad by itself and that we can learn to use it safely (don’t drink too much, knowing when we had enough etc…). And yet we keep away alcohol from children. Why? Because it is a well-known fact that children may not have the capability to limit themselves; they might very well become addicted and fall into it.

Why should it be any different for mobile phones? We know it can become an addiction. And we also know that children do not have the means to limit themselves because of their young age.

Deliberately letting a kid having a phone for an indefinite amount of time is being irresponsible. What would be responsible is only allowing to use the phone for a limited time.

Schools banning phone could be one way towards that. It would be a good way too because the kid would not be suffering from any social pressure from their peers as everyone would be concerned with the ban.