Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Yes, this is how social interaction in the real world, or even smaller online communities, has worked for ages.

It's only on pseudonymous mega-sites like Twitter, Reddit and HN where jumping down people's throats for having an opposing viewpoint is even a thing.



Boy oh boy, I should take you to some Board of Education meetings.


These are actually fine in most places.

You only see videos of the out of control ones because they're the weird ones.

If you only view the world through the snippets that are noteworthy enough to make headlines or get a lot of votes on Reddit, you end up with a very skewed view of what the world is like.


> If you only view the world through the snippets that are noteworthy enough to make headlines or get a lot of votes on Reddit, you end up with a very skewed view of what the world is like.

I think this very much depends on where you live. I'm not responding to reddit videos, I'm responding to events that my family and some friends who are in public education.


[flagged]


Ah, I see you're doing your part to help make the online world a better place

/s


No it isn't. Small online communities are generally run as a dictatorship. If you disagree with the mods, well screw you.

In the real world it's a bit more nuanced because people care more about conflict in the real world. But even so there's usually a core group of people with similar beliefs and outsiders are pushed away.

In the corporate world conflicting viewpoints in e.g. religion or politics are generally dealt with by making talking about them taboo or explicitly banning it.

When you don't do that you get the mess that Google has found itself in several times recently where someone makes some comment that the majority disagree with (positive discrimination is bad, AI is sentient, etc) and other employees call for them to be fired.

I can't think of many groups that actually manage to get people with opposing viewpoints to get on with each other without just banning talking about them. Universities maybe. The army perhaps?


Facebook seems to be the most politically divisive to me and it's not pseudonymous.


So it seems people don’t say in public what they really think? Would that explain why we have very different votes during democratic elections compared to what media wants?


You know, there are best practices for moderating discussions.

https://coralproject.net/blog/five-myths-of-community-design...


People beat others or kill others over difference of opinion. And sometimes, the "difference of opinion" is that some people think a this or that minority should be killed while minority disagree.


Also, <sportsball>


the hypothesis that attaching real names to posts improves civility is over ten years out of date


"With real names" is not the same as "in the real world."

There is a massive difference between me seeing a stranger's real name next to a Facebook post about how abortion is evil, and me having a conversation with a good friend of 10 years, or my mom, and it comes up that they're pro-life.

We might have a long debate, but in the end, they're still my friend or family.


Have you been anywhere near a university lately? There’s a contingent of super militant students, supported by certain faculty, that spend their time policing who is allowed to have a “platform” and what’s acceptable speech.


Tbh, it's worse in the real world, at least in the U.S., with the Democratic-Republican divide. I've personally witnessed extreme rage, foul language yelled at very loud voices, when folks from these two sides met (and talked about anything that was even slightly contentious).




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2026 batch! Applications are open till July 27.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: