Imzy wants to be a kinder, gentler version of Reddit • Hacker News Board

Re: Imzy wants to be a kinder, gentler version of Reddit

#271

Post by webwanderings » Sun, Dec 11, 2016, 1:25 AM UTC

NotAMoose wrote: post #269

webwanderings wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't see this as their basic premise. Their basic premise seems to hinge on the idea of "tipping people's niceness". If I am nice and helpful, then I should expect to earn a penny. And I should do the same to others. That's actually very similar to the plot of Black Mirror's Nosedive episode. I tried to hang on there but I didn't find much motivation to "earn anything". I am not even sure why I should reward anyo…

>Their basic premise seems to hinge on the idea of "tipping people's niceness". This isn't actually true. Some news article decided that was our basic premise because it made a good clickbait headline. Our tipping system is the beginning of a larger business model that we hope to implement in the future. https://medium.com/imzyhq/why-imzy-doesnt-have-ads-and-what-... We don't want to have advertisements on the site,…

Isn't the business model the real premise? Without which, you won't be able to self-sustain, which then renders any other supposed premise, useless.

Re: Imzy wants to be a kinder, gentler version of Reddit

#272

Post by NotAMoose » Sun, Dec 11, 2016, 1:28 AM UTC

this-dang-guy wrote: post #223

60654 wrote: post #43

I've been using imzy since very early on, and I have to say, I really like the idea of it. The basic premise is basically: "do whatever but play nice". And if you don't play nice you get modded and eventually kicked out. I can get behind that TBH. Also, to be sure, they do have some growing pains to go through. There are too many empty communities at this point (they should've started with fewer high-traffic ones). A…

The concept is nice but I have a real issue with this part: Why do they need pixel tags for tracking, and why don't they support DNT? No 'new' website should put up with this. I'll cut some slack to the 2010 and before era sites, since they've got a lot of legacy to work with. Pixel Tags. In addition, we use "Pixel Tags" (also referred to as clear Gifs, Web beacons, or Web bugs). Pixel Tags are tiny graphic images wi…

Our emails use Pixel Tags, both our sendgrid emails and our intercom ones. That part of our Privacy Policy is boilerplate from the lawyers, I included that section because of the emails. Sorry if the phrasing is sorta awkward.

Regarding DNT- I should mention that we don't actually have advertising on the site. I feel like this might be a bit of flamebait on my part, but I think a lot of the time, DNT is just privacy theatre. Some sites (like Medium) have done a great job with DNT implementation, but I think the initiative has largely not worked out nearly as well as people would like.

(My opinions about DNT are my own, I'm not really speaking on behalf of Imzy regarding that.)

Re: Imzy wants to be a kinder, gentler version of Reddit

#273

Post by intortus » Sun, Dec 11, 2016, 1:44 AM UTC

makomk wrote: post #268

intortus wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

White hood wearing motherfuckers chomping at the bit to call black people "chimps" is not merely some alternative "clique", as you disingenuously suggest. The problem with tolerance of the intolerant is that you end up with an authoritarian monoculture where speech is much less free than it could have been.

You think that the only reason someone would disagree with you is because they're a literal KKK supporter, but this is somehow fighting against an authoritarian monoculture? Right. Had nothing to do with said clique's awful treatment of LGBT people, dubiously moral tactics, tendency to see anyone who disagrees as literal neo-Nazis, and utter refusal to brook any kind of internal dissent over anything at all, of cours…

> You think that the only reason someone would disagree with you is because they're a literal KKK supporter, but this is somehow fighting against an authoritarian monoculture?

This is a position that you've pulled straight out of your own ass. Is there any reason to believe that the rest of your loggorhea is any more truthful?

Re: Imzy wants to be a kinder, gentler version of Reddit

#274

Post by yladiz » Sun, Dec 11, 2016, 1:49 AM UTC

webwanderings wrote: post #270

grzm wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Expecting anything doesn't mean putting up with everything.

Again, you're looking at secondary matters. Look at the consequences which results due to the primary intention. Besides, nobody opens up their houses for strangers. So it is a flawed comparison as well. You need to be honest with the premise. You are talking about an online community which is built for a purpose. Your purpose is two-fold. You want to be a nice contributor towards some ideal (nothing wrong with that)…

What are you saying? This doesn't really make much sense. Are you arguing that inviting someone into your house, a stranger or not, means that they can demand whatever they want and you have no right to kick them out? Sorry if I'm not following but the idea of primary and secondary intention doesn't really make sense to me.

This argument is not about creating a "perfect social circle" with only specific people who have the same view points as you, it's that you can have someone who believes wildly different things than you but they are expected to be nice and treat the invitation into a community with respect, e.g. be nice, rather than do whatever they want. And if they disrespect the invitation, they have consequences.

Re: Imzy wants to be a kinder, gentler version of Reddit

#275

Post by webwanderings » Sun, Dec 11, 2016, 1:58 AM UTC

yladiz wrote: post #274

webwanderings wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, you're looking at secondary matters. Look at the consequences which results due to the primary intention. Besides, nobody opens up their houses for strangers. So it is a flawed comparison as well. You need to be honest with the premise. You are talking about an online community which is built for a purpose. Your purpose is two-fold. You want to be a nice contributor towards some ideal (nothing wrong with that)…

What are you saying? This doesn't really make much sense. Are you arguing that inviting someone into your house, a stranger or not, means that they can demand whatever they want and you have no right to kick them out? Sorry if I'm not following but the idea of primary and secondary intention doesn't really make sense to me. This argument is not about creating a "perfect social circle" with only specific people who ha…

> ...means that they can demand whatever

What I am simply saying is that setting such an expectation (via rules and enforcement) is unnatural for humans.

People are not going to "demand whatever" because they are not nice. You should expect them to demand whatever, even if they are nice.

What I am really trying to say is further explained here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13148978

Re: Imzy wants to be a kinder, gentler version of Reddit

#276

Post by grzm » Sun, Dec 11, 2016, 2:02 AM UTC

webwanderings wrote: post #270

grzm wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Expecting anything doesn't mean putting up with everything.

Again, you're looking at secondary matters. Look at the consequences which results due to the primary intention. Besides, nobody opens up their houses for strangers. So it is a flawed comparison as well. You need to be honest with the premise. You are talking about an online community which is built for a purpose. Your purpose is two-fold. You want to be a nice contributor towards some ideal (nothing wrong with that)…

I'll be honest. I don't know what your point is right now (which I admit you stated explicitly above: "You are missing the point"), other than to disagree. I've read and re-read your comments in this thread, and this one in particular in an effort to figure out where you're coming from.

I see no reason why the consequence of allowing people to join and contribute to an online community where they might do things I'm not happy with (I think that's what you're getting at when you say "consequence")—which I understand will happen—also doesn't mean I can't have expectations of their behavior and choose to, say, kick them off if they don't meet those expectations. I haven't expressed this explicitly, but I don't think it's much of a reach from what I've posted upthread.

At best we're talking past each other, but I'm going to take my answer off the air.

Re: Imzy wants to be a kinder, gentler version of Reddit

#277

Post by yladiz » Sun, Dec 11, 2016, 2:04 AM UTC

webwanderings wrote: post #275

yladiz wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are you saying? This doesn't really make much sense. Are you arguing that inviting someone into your house, a stranger or not, means that they can demand whatever they want and you have no right to kick them out? Sorry if I'm not following but the idea of primary and secondary intention doesn't really make sense to me. This argument is not about creating a "perfect social circle" with only specific people who ha…

> ...means that they can demand whatever What I am simply saying is that setting such an expectation (via rules and enforcement) is unnatural for humans. People are not going to "demand whatever" because they are not nice. You should expect them to demand whatever, even if they are nice. What I am really trying to say is further explained here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13148978

But just because they can demand whatever does not mean you have to fulfill their request.

Re: Imzy wants to be a kinder, gentler version of Reddit

#278

Post by sanswork » Sun, Dec 11, 2016, 2:16 AM UTC

AlexB138 wrote: post #86

So what they really mean is "Reddit without anyone who will disagree with your sophomoric views on politics" it seems. It's people's choice if they want to dig into a non-threatening bubble, but it's fairly sad. You don't grow by surrounding yourself with people just like you.

I've used reddit for around 10 years now and the past 3 or so it has become a seriously hate filled place full of awful people. It makes me a worse person when I interact regularly there these days so I rarely do.

If people on the other side of the political spectrum to me can't express their views without being rude or mean than honestly I don't care about their opinions. Is that living in a bubble? No it is choosing not to interact with people that I consider to be jerks. It's only living in a bubble if you let some social network define your life.

What I find sad is how upset people are getting here at the idea that not everyone wants to deal with them. It's like there is a surprise that there has been a backlash against jerks and all the jerks are sitting around complaining about no one wanting to be friends with them anymore and how the other people are jerks for that.

Re: Imzy wants to be a kinder, gentler version of Reddit

#279

Post by webwanderings » Sun, Dec 11, 2016, 2:20 AM UTC

yladiz wrote: post #277

webwanderings wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ...means that they can demand whatever What I am simply saying is that setting such an expectation (via rules and enforcement) is unnatural for humans. People are not going to "demand whatever" because they are not nice. You should expect them to demand whatever, even if they are nice. What I am really trying to say is further explained here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13148978

But just because they can demand whatever does not mean you have to fulfill their request.

But now that's a different point altogether, isn't it? We were not talking about whether one should fulfill the demands or not. This also does not imply that the implicit rules can be automatically enforced.

If you agree that the rule-setting is unnatural under such context (i.e, the context of an online community, dealing with humans and human nature), then you would agree that you should first fix your own expectations.

If you read my comment about the Scott Peck's framework, then you can see that at the first stage, humans are generally nice to each other in any group setting. This is a modern condition: the consequences of civilized societies. But humans also tend to reach the second stage, where they are totally not nice to each other. If you read him directly, you'll get the better idea.

This argument of freedom of speech, or lack there of, is misguided and misplaced in my opinion. It tends to come up at every opportunity (every normalized social network now initially had this argument when they started in the beginning - and we're still having this misplaced argument.

Re: Imzy wants to be a kinder, gentler version of Reddit

#280

Post by rtpg » Sun, Dec 11, 2016, 2:22 AM UTC

webwanderings wrote: post #271

NotAMoose wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Their basic premise seems to hinge on the idea of "tipping people's niceness". This isn't actually true. Some news article decided that was our basic premise because it made a good clickbait headline. Our tipping system is the beginning of a larger business model that we hope to implement in the future. https://medium.com/imzyhq/why-imzy-doesnt-have-ads-and-what-... We don't want to have advertisements on the site,…

Isn't the business model the real premise? Without which, you won't be able to self-sustain, which then renders any other supposed premise, useless.

I think for more community-run sites, the business model is not the real premise.

No one would say that the real premise of Wikipedia is collecting donations.