Posting this because no one else seems to want to, and it’s a discussion worth having outside of drama or personal conflicts. I’m undecided and can see both sides, but it’s important to address.

Potential benefits of a limit:

  • Frequent posters hold significant influence and could, in theory, push misinformation or propaganda (though I haven’t seen evidence of this it’s a fair concern).
  • A community dominated by one or two voices might discourage new members from participating.
  • Encouraging quality over quantity could increase the value of individual posts.

Potential downsides of a limit:

  • Could reduce overall community engagement.
  • If set too low, it might discourage meaningful participation from well-intentioned members.
  • It could inadvertently encourage the (mis)use of alt accounts.

These are some pros/cons but certainly not all! I encourage more discussion below.

  • gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world
    3·
    21 hours ago

    Posting this because no one else seems to want to,

    Maybe because it’s a bad idea that wouldn’t solve something that’s not even a problem but would make the community more difficult to use.

    • Frequent posters don’t hold any more special influence than irregular posters, posts are sorted by their upvotes and downvotes not by who posts them.
    • A community with stupid rules that removes your post for no reason because you went beyond some arbitrary limit will discourage new members from participating
    • It is dumb to think about a news community in terms of quality and quantity. Not every news article should be some 10000 word Pulitzer prize winning deep dive, some of them are just going to be two paragraph breaking news updates. Also, there are some days where not a lot of news happens and some days where a ton happens, and this idea would just make the community struggle to be relevant and up to date on those big news days. If somebody posts a dumb news story, downvote it and leave a comment about why it’s dumb and post a better one.
    • I don’t want you or anyone else determining the value of another post for me beyond your up/downvote and comment. If the post actually breaks a community rule that we’ve all been informed about and agree to by participating then a mod can remove it, but if you just don’t like what’s being discussed then just downvote and deal with it, and if you just don’t like the person who posted it then please fuck off with your incivility to another website.
    • People who really do want to push misinformation will just make alts that will work around this system, so you’ll be making the community harder for people to use transparently while doing nothing to discourage bad actors

    and it’s a discussion worth having outside of drama or personal conflicts.

    If you wanted to avoid personal conflicts maybe don’t propose a rule judging posts based on who posted them and what else they’ve posted instead of the content of the post itself

    • spujb@lemmy.cafeOPEnglish
      33·
      19 hours ago

      Thanks for your input! It is valuable.

      Re: your last paragraph. I’m literally just a third party user who was not involved in any of the conflict in any way, suggesting one potential resolution that at this point I still think could go either way.

      It’s fair to assume that I was talking about myself but rest assured I have no personal investment here and my only commitment is to what is best for the community. :)