>>691
heavy moderation is a blessing actually. the problem with most of the internet right now is that there isn't enough. that's why everything is ragebait now, why everyone is a debate addict, why internet conversations have become so unproductive in general. the big platforms are horrifying free-for-all s because that's what generates engagement and thus data and ad revenue
conversations between radically opposing views is literally useless. for example, two coworkers discussing which framework to use for their next project is a debate because it is going to have good faith arguments made by people that are knowledgeable on the subject, and it will produce actionable conclusions. two guys with antagonistic positions arguing on reddit about some vague platitude is the opposite of a debate. the more opposed the views, the less useful the conversation will be
but there has to be some distance between the two parties for any debate to exist in the first place, so you could say that there is a productive "window of opposition", before which any debate is pointless and after which any debate is useless. it depends on the topic, but I would say that, at least on the internet, that window has become rather narrow
why has it become so narrow? because the lack of moderation means that it is okay to insult and disrespect the other side, so discussions become more about "owning" the other than about learning, understanding or arriving at conclusions. every conversation is actually a personal debate and if you lose you become the soy wojak, forever
