For me, it was that the Internet never forgets and that you should never enter your real name. In my opinion, both of these rules are now completely ignored.
Don’t talk to strangers.
Searching things is easy so don’t post something without checking it. People now don’t make the slightest effort to verify a rumor or conspiracy crap.
and, conversely, posting things you have “verified”
“You’re wrong! I was able to prove it with a quick Google!”
Your knowledge coming from a ‘quick google’ isn’t the flex you think it is. Most things that can be proven with a quick google are false.
Ah, defending no research. Gotcha
Basic forum etiquette. It’s horrifying at work seeing teams “teams” (forums) used like chats, all the cross-posting and thread necromancy, people completely unable to keep topics confined to the appropriate sub-forum, etc
thread necromancy
AKA “discussing something with new information more than 31 seconds after people got bored of it”
Been to the Arch forum too ey? :p
Necroposting is a slur by the terminally online against normal people trying to get shot done. They’re the reason why every Google search that leads to a forum ends with some guy asking your question and being told to start a new thread instead.
some guy asking your question and being told to start a new thread instead.
If it’s done within a reasonable time period, it’s understandable. Hours or a day or two later depending on the forum.
It’s different when someone saunters in years later with the “I’ve got the same problem!” quip to a post that may or may not actually be the same, and actually expects a response. That, to me, is necroposting.
This is the attitude that leads us to search results polluted with forum threads with bad, unchallengeable ideas (because they’re locked). Almost all web1 forum are becoming digital flotsam because of these bad moderator opinions.
This is the attitude that leads us to search results polluted with forum threads with bad, unchallengeable ideas (because they’re locked). Almost all web1 forum are becoming digital flotsam because of these bad moderator opinions.
I thing you replied to the wrong comment, buddy. Nothing in your comment makes any sense in the context of my comment that you replied to. Nowhere did I say anything about locking threads or moderation.
The very idea of necroposting is the basis for these moderator opinions. It is not a neutral term, the idea of necroposting is a negative attitude toward all late posts, it is a permission that all moderators give themselves to delete late posts, lock threads or even, auto lock after a determined period of inactivity. It makes these ideas, prominent on search result into literally unassailable answers. Which is the secret desire of all moderators, to decide the final word.
I think you are ascribing to an entire community that which only a few descend to.
I’ve been a mod on forums before, and my only concern was keeping the signal::noise ratio high. In that regard, new “I’ve got the same problem” posts made many months or years after the current thread had gotten wrapped up only increases the noise; a new thread is far more appropriate for the latecomer and anyone who replies to them than continuing to use the old thread.
The difference is temporal, and dependent on the activity level of the forum in question: highly active forums should see new threads spawned after only a few days or weeks, slow forums could see follow-up comments in the original thread still being appropriate many months or even years later.
Being a good mod isn’t about power or control, it is ensuring the forum operates as effectively as possible for it’s users. Sometimes that means spawning new threads, locking old ones, or even banning bad-faith or misbehaving users. Once you moderate, you discover very quickly that moderation is a highly grey zone, with surprisingly little black or white.
I see necroposting as when it’s someone coming by months or years after the discussion is over and not bringing much of value to the table. So it’s more to do with the value of the contribution than the timeframe
In a forum system that sorts by last comment that can be annoying. Which is why most systems seem to have moved away from that, it was one of the big innovations of reddit back when it started. But in a format where it doesn’t get more visibility for getting comments I don’t see why it’s a bad thing, just stop reading when you deem the topic done.
During thr brief window between reddit apps dying and the old archive rule being revoked getting comments on old tech support posts with follow ups and/or additional questions was pretty great, and definitely worth the occasional whitenoise posts (“thanks!” " seeing the same problem in 2024" “I clearly didn’t read the whole thread and am asking something already answered” etc etc).
In a forum system that sorts by last comment that can be annoying.
I’ll be real, I entirely forgot that was a thing. Why are you reviving terrible memories like that?!
How is that really different from the same comment 2 second after. It just isn’t.
Just ban hammer low the value commenters don’t lock the thread for moderator convenience.
Never disclose any real personal info.
I was taught to cite websites by using the date the page was updated. Now I’m lucky if web pages even have a date on them.
You could always use the Page Information to get the Created and Last updated from the web server.
Oh, wait. All the pages are dynamically generated,.so both of those are dated now. 😥
Oh, that one’s easy! Just use the internet archivenevermind.
“Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory” was both a lie (typically invoked to defend/justify bigotry, bullying, and such) and it also served to normalize people being assholes on the internet. “Perfectly well adjusted wholesome ordinary people chant nazi slogans when they log onto the internet, for real guys! It says nothing about their character as people because for some magical reason the internet totally has no connections to lived human experiences!”
I’m glad that the so-called rule fell out of use and the excuse rings very hollow for most people now. Also, I noticed that many “ironic asshole” comedians and entertainers from the “le epic trolling” era wound up being actual assholes that hurt people outside of the act. “Million Dollar Extreme” and Justin Roiland come to mind.
Huh. I never saw that used as an excuse. I always took it as, “normal” people show their true colors when they feel divorced from consequences for their actions/speech
Same. I think OP may have missed the point, although they’re right that there’s more to it than the rule makes it seem like.
That’s crazy. Makes a lot of sense.
I always tried to be the “shockingly nice person to game with” whenever I could. It was a lot more fun than just being mean to people for no reason.
I never understood that impulse to scream epithets over xbox live or whatever.
I’ve found the best way to really infuriate online edgelords was to be patient yet firm with them.
Like a parent.
Stick with the gopher protocol, http is too poorly implemented.
you really think someone would do that? go on the internet and tell lies?
Don’t believe everything you see. Actually I was taught that about TV, but for some reason the old folks forgot about it being applicable everywhere in life, not just on TV. They also forget about it on TV too.
Stay anonymous
Don’t feed the trolls
but then I post on lemmy.world and get so so many repliesI remember when it was just funny edgy humor that was clearly satirical for the most part because a lot of us were just dumb kids. It was abrasive and stupid but you had this feeling everyone was in on the joke.
But bizarre satire has turned to deeply held conviction.
I’m not just sad that the mean spirited trolling persists, but that it’s gotten more sincere and often must be taken seriously. :(
The fact that people being assholes with their real names on Facebook tells me, anonymity has nothing to do with it.
Don’t feed the AI
More recently, this behaviour is known as “driving engagement”
When reading a long text, disconnect from the internet as soon as it has loaded so you don’t pay for the time you spend reading.
I remember doing that to read and write my answers in forums. Then someone had already posted the same comment or a better version.
When you share something cool, link back to the original creator or where you found it from.
I’d argue this is the opposite of what was asked.
In the early days, no one would post sources or attribute “stuff” to anyone. We’d all just share what we thought were cool pictures.
Now, everyone gets mad when you dont post the name of the artist and their socials.
I would posit a big part of this is because early-net days were primarily for just socializing and sharing cool stuff (heck yeah, I miss it.) Artists probably didn’t make a majority of their living through the 'net. If something was shared it was likely just “I think this is cool, folks!”
Nowadays, to say the Internet is heavily commercialized would be a massive understatement. Every little interaction is monetized. Many people make their entire living through e-commerce. It’s just how things went.
Meanwhile you have a billion faceless sandfleas with repost-botfarms trying to hustle cash with the stupidest methods possible.
You’ll see entire channels where animations or paintings or whatever are circulated on socials like youtube, twitter, or tiktok with the artist tag conveniently cropped out (if there was one).
Some are outright stealing the work for profit (selling tshirts or something), while others are just using it to farm clicks, which is also a route to profit.
The artist who made the work is cheated, perhaps unaware, as some click-grifter gets all the attention. And that sucks. :( As an artist myself, I try to make sure I share the sources for stuff now, because recognition is a form of thanks, at the very least.
I miss the sharing internet…the attention economy has basically turned the internet into a sociological illustration of “The paperclip apocalypse”. :(
What people are really mad about us the fact that artists are (and always have been) starving. We throw so much food away, let the artists cook for fucks sake.
This might be more of a blogosphere-era thing I guess. Even when most people blogging did it for pleasure rather than work, it was always considered polite to “hat tip” (h/t) the source of a given link, if you happened to find it on someone else’s site.
Social media killed online aliases and I have a hard time deciding if we’re all worse for it.
Instinctively I still stick by that, though, as you can tell by my anonymous profile with no bio, but when I volunteer any amount of personal info these days people are often confused that I’m not sharing openly who I am or where I’m from. Every time someone does that it weirds me out because in the 90s telling (and asking) people those things would have been such a suspicious, sketchy move.
in the 90s telling (and asking) people those things would have been such a suspicious, sketchy move.
a/s/l?
We were all 18/f/cal come on man…
Haha true
Aight, I put on my robe and wizard’s hat.
RIP bloodninja.
Every time someone does that it weirds me out because in the 90s telling (and asking) people those things would have been such a suspicious, sketchy move.
And now it’s come 180 in that some see it as a red flag if you don’t give up that information. I had someone on a different social media site accuse me of being a bot because I wouldn’t give up the specific town I’m from. I’ve seen it happen to others too. It is both fascinating and insane how viewpoints have changed regarding identifying yourself online.
Not only telling your real name, you weren’t supposed to tell your real birthday, give away your phone number or where you lived, even just saying the city was a bit much. So filling in those things like on Facebook or LinkedIn feels very wrong but it would be even more wrong to have fake info there. So my new rule is, only add ppl I know irl to places I use my real info and everything else can I add anyone to.
Ugh, the world of “branded people.” Everything is like “Add a picture of yourself, or you won’t seem trustworthy!”
Yeesh. Some artists and such can make it using a pseudonym, but it’s rare in more professional circles…but now if you hope to be taken seriously as a professional, you’re expected to put your real super genuine self out there.
…and we get news stories of people being harassed and doxxed literally to death. It’s crazy…
Yes that picture thing happened multiple times at my old job. They kept pestering me about give them a pic to add to the “about us” page and I had to use my face in all channels (jira, slack email and so on) because “otherwise I can’t tell who is who”… my current job handled that much better, they asked for a pic (if I wanted to) to be used as reference for an artist (always the same) to make an avatar and that is now the avatar my coworkers and I use in presentations, systems, emails, webpages anything, we never use real image of our coworkers unless the person wish for it.
Facebook tried that shit with me. Ban until I sent verification of my ID so I sent a paystub photoshopped (badly) with my alias, it was accepted and it’s still there even though I left FB years ago.
I wish they would ban me. I haven’t logged in in over 15 years and even block several of their servers, and yet I still get mails that someone in there commented on something.
Oh I get zero notifications, but the only real reason I haven’t taken it down is that my posts from IG are cross posted there for the business, which I have to have to advertise our specials because of the boomers that use it daily.
Shit, I provide every single service with randomly generated data, unless legally required. Just doing my part to pollute the training day.
Don’t top post.
Breaking the rules to demonstrate how this looks dumb
Don’t top post.
Exception: when the quoted thing is the punchline
The thing that grinds my gears
WARNING: I’m not actually a quotation tho my
>character says that is what I am for in the specification & if you check my HTML markup I am a<blockquote>which also has a spec saying I must quote a sourceMarkdown-itis is ruining semantics on the web just ’cause it doesn’t support callouts like a proper lightweight markup syntax for documentation, technical writing, & blogging. It is the wrong tool for these mediums but users forgo caring about semantics for the familar not even understand their tools or their outputs.
twitter built itself on doing this the most nonsensical and annoying way possible.
I’ve never used Twitter and every time I see a post with like… the original comment in the middle, a reply on top, and a reply again? On bottom? I’m like what the fuck is even how
Came here to say that. It actually predates common internet usage - Fidonet was a much bigger thing through the 80s and early 90s than emails, and BBS forums used it to distribute messages.
Properly quote only what you are replying to. Quote a line, reply to it. Repeat on multiple points.
Then wait a few days for a reply, of course, unless they were dialling into the same BBS.
Now we have boards like this that do a pretty good job about displaying context and quoting is less needed.
… except when it’s a forwarded convo and then it’s okay, as per 1855.
And then when is a conversation NOT a comment or update to something you’ve forwarded back? The answer is never.
So it’s all good.
Gmail is super annoying at this, there is no way to automatically turn this off. I just have to delete the ellipsis every damn time
I think it’s fine for email, better even. Unless there’s a list of questions or something. In forums and lemmy I don’t see it at all.
I like to think I’m reasonably intelligent but whatever the heck Gmail does with its reply “conversation” order absolutely bamboozles me. It decides to just hide messages in the middle seemingly at random too, and gives them all reply buttons.
Agh!
Ew. Who does that?
The same people who carelessly hit “reply all”, I imagine. Lol
