this post was submitted on 25 Jun 2025
25 points (80.5% liked)

Fedigrow

293 readers
83 users here now

To discuss how to grow and manage communities / magazines on Lemmy, Mbin, Piefed and Sublinks

Resources:

Megathreads:

Rules:

  1. Be respectful
  2. No bigotry

founded 2 weeks ago
MODERATORS
 

Dog-piling is when someone expresses an opinion and people swarm in the comments telling the OC how wrong they are and how right they are. Typically the person getting dogpiled is downvoted into oblivion in the process. Note that I'm not talking about anything controversial in their opinion or the comment being trolling in any way; just any general disagreement with the groupthink.

Brief example:

User 1:  There are lots of factors at play here, not just money.  There's X, Y, Z, and those are all independent from money.
  |____> User 2: No, it's money.  It's always money
  |______>  User 4: Right?  How can anyone think it's anything *but* money?  Some people!
  |____> User 3: Yes, well, X, Y, and Z wouldn't be a problem if not for capitalism, so it's definitely money, and you're wrong.
  |____> User 5: It all boils down to money; always does.
  |____> User 6: Of course it's money.  Only a capitalist bootlicker would think otherwise.
  |____> User 7: Go back to Reddit, troll.
  |____> User 8: You're so close, but it's money.  
  ...
  |____> User 999: (Same as the last 998 comments; contributes nothing except attacking the opinion for being different)

None of that adds anything to the discussion; they're not engaging on the subject, just attacking the opinion because it differs.

That behavior does not seem healthy to me and seems like it's almost designed to discourage anyone from expressing any opinion that's not part of the established group think. Again, I am not talking about trolls here, just any kind of differing opinions.

Should that kind of behavior be discouraged? If so, as a mod, what would be the best way to address it? After the 2nd or 3rd dogpile comment, start removing subsequent ones that are just piling on?

It's definitely a people problem, so I'm curious what would be a gentle but firm way to deal with it.

(page 2) 29 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 1 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (6 children)

What you are talking about is a normal internet conversation.

If you don't want everyone showing up to call you dumb then don't say stupid things lol

There's a clear difference between people being mean to someone who didn't know better vs someone who is full of shit

[–] P00ptart@lemmy.world -2 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

There's a difference here. I got it for calling this quote "Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect." Copypasta.

Which it is. It's true, but It's also tired and old, and people just post that with nothing else to add. Just that. It's not even saying the quote is wrong or anything. Just that copypasta is annoying and lazy. Downvote and dog-piled for that opinion? Who would defend copypasta? Yet as of my last check, at least 92 people like just seeing that quote randomly posted over and over and over.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 1 points 18 hours ago

I see where you're coming from. I feel that joke comments that detail a whole thread I'd like to have discussion in is extremely frustrating. I sometimes wish they'd be banned, they're not adding anything to the post, except... Maybe it's helpful to people from becoming utterly hopeless and cynical.

I've thought about your point a decent amount of time for a few years and my thoughts are: people will people. It's for moderation teams to set rules and lead by example and clean up messes, if users refuse to self mod. Sometimes dogpiling is that, other times just disagreement that agrees with someone else's reasoning. Other times, it's just validation seeking because people have no firm seld-identity and/or core beliefs. Maybe they'll develop them if something really resonates, all exceptions acknowledged and considered. We don't learn from being correct very often. We do by being incorrect, or finding exceptions that ~~flour~~ flout our ideals.

[–] Tramort@programming.dev 1 points 19 hours ago

You're asking a great question! I don't see any easy answers though

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 0 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago)

I mean, considering that for literally years, dog-piling was both engaged in and practically encouraged by moderation, it would seem like a step in the right direction.

The solution is to stop using moderation as a cudgel to create echo chambers. Specifically, c/World, c/Politics, and c/Political_Memes were explicitly filtered to a specific view of American politics by moderation over the course of 2023-2024. Squid was particularly notable for regularly flaming people to then ban them.

Moderation needs to be held to a real standard, but has continued to be used in an incredibly editorial fashion.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›