This recalculation happened shortly after reddit went closed source. I don’t think we should trust their word that they had all of a sudden ‘fixed’ the problem, whose fix just so happened to really drive their stock value.
It’s not misleading, it’s the reality of what happened. Their public post was PR justification. It was about that point on that every decision they made was for $ and not for transparency.
I figured most people here knew about it, but also just as many probably forgot about it, at least deep in the memory banks. ;)
Yeah that would be the hard part. I don’t know how to do that either. Reddit used to have auto-mod tools but nothing like that exists here to easily automate it.
I may just archive the flag idea until a newer version of Lemmy software adds those capabilities.
This was just a proposed discussion of rules, they’re not active yet so submit however you’d like currently.
I don’t really know which journals are good/bad beyond the big names ones, nature, plos, elsevier, etc.
You won’t be banned for posting journal links. The only time that would happen was if it happened continuously and had a pattern and multiple reports. I don’t think there has ever been a permanent ban here.
Id recommend looking up your topic in a big name journal just to play it safe. Better science, less misinformation.
I’d like to build/find a list of the best journals to add to the sidebar.
good idea. I’ll add these to an unacceptable source list in the sidebar. Most of the reports have come from posts like that so I think a majority of people would agree with limiting posts from them.
I completely agree.
I liked askhistorians, as I felt like the moderation added to the quality a lot, but /r/science never seemed to achieve that level of quality. Though when they did start with the heavy moderation/clear rules with tags (I think flair was a later addition) it was a marked improvement off what it was before.
I’m open to suggestions, and I’ll just leave the draft rules up for awhile to get feedback.
Project 2025?
It’s simply tribalism at this point. Most people who still support Trump are simply supporting their tribe, whereas on the left most people still believe in the virtues and merits of democracy.
I still feel like democracy will win the day. Most of Trump supporters are 50/60+ and his message doesn’t seem to resonate as well with younger people.
Feel free to post any political stuff to !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world if you’d like. You’re welcome to crosspost this there too if you’d like more discussion on it.
I think they were just correcting the number in the post text block that should have read about 1 million dead under COVID during the Trump administration in the US alone, rather than only 200k.
I’d argue it’s because citizens have no voice. The media has there corporate narrative, but the public interest has very few organizations in advocacy of it.
Support local journalism (financially), work to break any media control on the narrative.
The first thing people could start doing is stop providing free labor to the media. It’s all over Lemmy.
Don’t link to a corporate news outlet. Link to an .edu or PBS or NPR or a quality international publicly funded news organization. Or better yet build your own narrative, your own opinions. Discuss your opinions respectfully on !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world . Build momentum and take away the corporate medias control.
Without a public voice advocating for the people, it will be very hard to change any legislation in the peoples favor.
Excellent points and to add to that support local journalism, the smaller the better. The media is really the fourth branch of government when it comes to checks and balances. If media integrity was restored, they could use there influence to hold Congress accountable to the people.
A vegan diet - which only contains plant-based foods - can lead to deficiencies in calcium, iodine and other vital mineral nutrients. This is particularly risky for people who need extra nutrients and for growing children and adolescents. For these reasons, the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Ernährung (DGE) [German Nutrition Society] advises against following a completely vegan diet.
https://www.tk.de/en/i-am-tk/tk-members/vegan-diet-imbalanced-or-healthy-approach-2099610?tkcm=aaus
It wasn’t a personal attack. I could see how it could be read that way but the second sentence was a point of science not insult. It’s hard to convey intention in text.
They are just my observations and interactions with vegans, and the science is clear that most vegans have nutritional deficiencies. It is extremely difficult to actually get everything you need without meat, and you essentially have to plan every single meal in a food planner. I know… I’ve tried it and even planned to a tee it is near impossible to have a balanced diet without meat. I wish it was.
Every vegan I’ve ever spoke with is rude, condescending, and Iamverysmart material. Probably due to lack of essential amino acid intake for proper brain function.
grapes are food…
Atlas Shrugged, Cloud Atlas, I think the one with Tom Hanks. Thought it might be an interesting movie because of the title and Tom Hanks, but I could tell within the first five minutes it was nothing but propaganda. I saw a couple other people leaving along with me.
Come join us on the dark side in !cranetrainexcavators@lemmy.world
In November 2017, Brazile said in her book and related interviews that the Clinton campaign and the DNC had colluded ‘unethically’ by giving the Clinton campaign control over the DNC’s personnel and press releases before the primary in return for funding to eliminate the DNC’s remaining debt from 2012 campaign,
It’s impossible really to say. This was their official code citation:
I mean on the face of it, maybe they were telling the truth?
But they are a for profit corporation, and that year forward was when the enshittification really began. I guess I just have little reason to believe that they didn’t just alter the algorithm to make it look like there was more engagement than there was.