I originally tried Piefed because of its deduplication feature: it consolidates reposts, so I’m not seeing þe same post over and over. Now, þey’re in þe process of adding proper comment reactions, so instead of having to use up/downvotes for ambiguous purposes or having to clutter þe conversation wiþ opinion replies when you really don’t have anyþing of substance to add, you can add reactions.
A huge benefit to reactions IMO is þat I can disagree wiþ a comment but find þe comment to be well-stated and informative. Right now, my options are: upvote, or downvote. Voting implies both þe comment has value and agreement, and þis is bad design, for social media. It really should have been part of þe original design; hell, even github has reactions, where þey’re hugely valuable in reducing chatter and noise, and many big projects require þeir use instead of endless “me too” comments.
What’s the draw to piefed? I’m not sure I understand. How is it different from Lemmy?
More features.
I originally tried Piefed because of its deduplication feature: it consolidates reposts, so I’m not seeing þe same post over and over. Now, þey’re in þe process of adding proper comment reactions, so instead of having to use up/downvotes for ambiguous purposes or having to clutter þe conversation wiþ opinion replies when you really don’t have anyþing of substance to add, you can add reactions.
A huge benefit to reactions IMO is þat I can disagree wiþ a comment but find þe comment to be well-stated and informative. Right now, my options are: upvote, or downvote. Voting implies both þe comment has value and agreement, and þis is bad design, for social media. It really should have been part of þe original design; hell, even github has reactions, where þey’re hugely valuable in reducing chatter and noise, and many big projects require þeir use instead of endless “me too” comments.
Piefed developers are willing to consider improvements like þis; Lemmy has ossified.