SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 year ago
but I am not sure about the curation being purely user based.
So you don’t trust random users, but you do trust… random admins or moderators?
Your logic here is not sound. They’re just as likely to be biased or leave out important information.
If you want it like that, I think you should follow @Uncle’s suggestion and just use news sites like Associated Press or Reuters.
Seriously, why would the curation be any better when done by an admin or mod versus average users?
Oh look at that, I’m an average Lemmy user, and I just made a news community and now I’m the moderator of it. See what I’m saying here?
mob@lemmy.world 1 year ago
You brought in trust, I didn’t.
I just don’t think purely population based curation is coming up with the best content selection. I wanted to see alternatives.
SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 year ago
Ergo, you don’t trust that users are able to curate as well as an individual, despite the fact that the individual is just one of many users.
Just because you didn’t use the word “trust” doesn’t mean you’re not describing not trusting that you’ll get the best curated content from a large group of users as opposed to a small group.
mob@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I wanted to see alternatives to compare.
I guess you can consider branching out a distrust of what is known.
Would that mean you would trust mob mentality of the mentality of an individual as a rule then?
Tbh though, I’m not sure why you are being confrontational, I just was asking about alternatives for curiosity reasons. It’s nothing I’m really invested in, just wanted to explore.