mechoman444

Christ on a stick. What a bunch of inane self important dribble. I bet you like to fart in a wine glass and smell it.

I have stated my points clearly. The fact that media and correspondence is posted in a public or private fasion is irrelevant.

This platform and others like it are not used as classically considered social media like Facebook point blank period. The function of this platform compared to other social media platforms is not the same it is so drastically different that it should not be categorized as social media. If anything these kinds of platforms are media aggregators or as I like to call them news aggregators. Regardless of your opinions on it and anonymity does play a role here.

The definition of social media is too vague and encompasses too many kinds of websites to be considered useful.

I’m not stating my opinion I’m challenging the fact that platforms like this are considered social media and I’m stating facts as to why that is. So far the only thing you’ve managed to do is “I’m very smart this is what social media is defined as”.

You haven’t actually countered any of my points in any way shape or form.

But you are concerned about the two other people that are going to read this common thread before it gets deleted fantastic. Good on you for thinking of the Everyman.

All you’re doing now is adding a modifier to suit your needs, shaping it into the definition of social media. By your logic, any website that hosts media and allows correspondence qualifies as social media. The fact that content is created by journalists (or who ever) rather than the public makes no difference under this definition.

Take ESPN.com, for example—it’s not comparable to platforms like Facebook or Reddit. Yet, it hosts media and provides a slight ability to correspond. Does that make it social media? Similarly, people watching a news broadcast on cable television and then discussing it over the phone wouldn’t turn cable TV into social media, even though discussion occurs. It’s simply not defined that way.

My contention is this: a website having media and a comment section doesn’t automatically qualify it as social media. Whether it operates as a public or private forum is irrelevant.

As for my point about anonymity, it’s a critical distinction between this platform and others like Facebook and Instagram. That distinction is relevant because it highlights a key difference in how these platforms function.

More importantly, I am making a personal statement: I do not consider Lemmy or Reddit to be social media. I understand they are categorized as such, but I am stating my disagreement with that classification.

This was my response to the exact same argument you have presented, although the other person was considerate enough to not include any personal attacks in his commentary to me.

I haven’t made up anything, I am simply using the definition of “social media” precisely.

In the same way, Reddit and Lemmy are categorized as social media because they share some elements traditionally associated with social media platforms. These elements are similar to features found on Facebook, Instagram, or TikTok, but are far more limited and only loosely resemble them.

The primary focus of platforms like Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok is to promote interaction and connection between users, often through real-world identities rather than anonymity. On the other hand, interactions on Reddit and Lemmy are almost exclusively anonymous and not necessarily encouraged as a central function of the platform.

By your definition, nearly anything could qualify as social media as long as it involves media and some capacity for correspondence. This broad and vague categorization dilutes the meaning of the term, making it less useful as a precise descriptor.

For this reason, I do not consider platforms like Reddit and Lemmy to be social media.

Ratio?

Look a car and a truck are basically the same thing. Visual appearance and application might be slightly different but ultimately they do the same thing one more than the other perhaps.

Lemmy and reddit don’t do the same things as other social media like Facebook Instagram and tiktok.

I already had this argument with another person in his comments thread I’m not going to have it with you.

You can believe what you want you can agree disagree with what you want. Lemmy and reddit are not social media.

(was looking through my comments and thought I would supplement my original comment to further exemplify your ignorance of Ayn rand’s work. This is just GPT generated but it generally emphasizes what I want to say)

The theme of responsibility is integral to Ayn Rand’s philosophy, but it is framed primarily as individual responsibility. In her works, characters are responsible for their own success, values, and moral integrity. They are expected to take ownership of their lives, work hard, and create value without relying on others for unearned rewards. This sense of personal accountability is deeply tied to her advocacy for rational self-interest and the rejection of altruism as a moral duty.

The comic largely ignores or subverts this theme. It portrays the caricature of Rand as shirking responsibility for fairness or mutual benefit, while justifying exploitation under the guise of “rational self-interest.” In contrast, Rand’s protagonists—such as Howard Roark in The Fountainhead or John Galt in Atlas Shrugged—embody the idea that self-interest is inseparable from productive effort and integrity. They take full responsibility for their work and its outcomes, even when faced with immense personal cost.

The workers in the comic, meanwhile, highlight the absence of reciprocal responsibility. In Rand’s view, individuals (or businesses) should not exploit others but should engage in voluntary, mutually beneficial exchanges. The satire undermines this by presenting the workers as victims of a one-sided interpretation of her philosophy, where responsibility is shouldered entirely by them while those in power evade it.

In essence, the comic exaggerates a critique that Rand’s philosophy allows those in power to neglect their responsibility to others, while her works emphasize a balanced moral code where responsibility to oneself and voluntary relationships are key.

Cannabis is classified as a Schedule 1 narcotic because of certain properties that vaguely resemble the effects of much stronger drugs such as LSD or heroin (politics notwithstanding).

In the same way, Reddit and Lemmy are categorized as social media because they share some elements traditionally associated with social media platforms. These elements are similar to features found on Facebook, Instagram, or TikTok, but are far more limited and only loosely resemble them.

The primary focus of platforms like Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok is to promote interaction and connection between users, often through real-world identities rather than anonymity. On the other hand, interactions on Reddit and Lemmy are almost exclusively anonymous and not necessarily encouraged as a central function of the platform.

By your definition, nearly anything could qualify as social media as long as it involves media and some capacity for correspondence. This broad and vague categorization dilutes the meaning of the term, making it less useful as a precise descriptor.

For this reason, I do not consider platforms like Reddit and Lemmy to be social media.

I understand that they’re categorized as such I understand they’re considered social media and I absolutely disagree with that categorization.

Yes. I understand that lemmy and reddit are considered social media for classification or legal purposes or what not.

I, personally do not agree with the classification nor do I consider either platform to be social media.

I would go so far as to argue that they are not infact social media but, again, news aggregators.

I would even state firmly that their classification as social media is incorrect.

In the same sense that cannabis is categorized as a schedule one narcotic but we all know it actually isn’t.

Your analogy is bad and you should feel bad.

I wouldn’t call this social interactions. Tress commentary between anonymous people in a comments sections hardly qualifies as social and even though it’s technically an interaction it’s only just.

If you compare this to say, Facebook the interaction levels massively different.

Yeah I knew there’d be one of you I don’t consider lemmy or reddit social media.

I considered them to be more or less news aggregators than anything else.

Just because there’s the ability to leave comments doesn’t necessarily make it social media.

This is how I sleep knowing the only social media account I have is Facebook and I hardly use it.

Looks like we dodged a bullet with God of war live service.

He’s not Chinese.

Or so he says.

Lots of people using libre office.

Where my open offices boys at!

I assume when you say stateless you are probably referring to the United States. Although there are other country’s with states but nevertheless the same would still apply.

You gotta be from somewhere. If you’re indigenous in the state of Ohio you’re still a resident of Ohio in the country of America. All laws still apply.

If you’re referring to something like a sovereign citizen all laws still apply regardless of what people like that may believe.

Thank you, this was the information I was looking for. I knew that the Nazi party was named as such but didn’t understand the implications.

Yes

I like how they say it’s a mutual endeavor and yet they obviously wasted this applicant’s time.

Good on Gupta for ghosting them.

I think this person means masturbation. Which doesn’t work, there is far, far better advice here than waxing the dolphin.

People will probably think I’m the most moderate right winger ever. But I’m really not. I just have hard opinions on things.