Unrelated meta-question:
In the screenshots in the article posted by bmiller2 https://www.theverge.com/2021/1/15/22232766/github-employees...
You can see something I honestly dislike very much in discussions - a "bombing" of emoji reactions during discussions.
For instance, the "I think this comment is completely appropriate" has 35 "+"-sign emojis. I find this concept of "reaction bulldozing" to cause any discussion to be shut down prematurely. Adding a reaction like that is so simple to do and doesn't require any effort, it's very easy to do, but actually adding your own opinion or nuanced explanation is very much harder, especially when the other side then already has so many "reaction emojis". I feel like the "signal-to-effort" ratio is completely skewed by this. You'd have to be a very assertive person to pierce through it and offer your, possibly only slightly, different opinion after seeing this.
I'm not sure what exactly it is that I dislike about it - does it stifle discussion? Does it diminish diversity of opinions? I think it does, if you're not early enough to give a dissenting opinion then it's you against the group, and I'm guessing a lot of people at that point would rather not react at all anymore.
Am I alone in thinking this? Is there a solution for this? I often encounter this phenomenon in discussions with engineers, not just with contentious topics like nazi's, but also e.g. styleguide or architectural discussions. I hope there's a word for it so I can learn how to deal with it, because currently I really can't pinpoint it.