Absolutely. Most non-fiction books I’ve read averaged about 9 hours for me to complete. 9 hours listening to an expert is such a trivial investment compared to a lifetime of half-baked speculation on a topic one doesn’t really understand. In 9 hours an expert can provide proper context, break down complex topics, and they have the space to fully explain their perspective and the stories that brought them to it.

The only content as informative and concise as a good book is a good lecture.

There’s no way to make a meme against a group or in support of an ideology without stripping away all the nuance and dehumanizing people. Many of the articles that are posted here are misleading and in some cases entirely untrue.

Yesterday, I down voted an article claiming “AP confirms no Uyghur genocide”. I read the cited AP article and found the post’s click bait title was completely false. The post’s author is pointing at a report that contradicts his beliefs and claiming that his beliefs are therefore correct because the article is lieing. It is fine to refute an article, but to twist an article’s words and then claim that the source says something it clearly doesn’t is just dishonest.

I believe misleading and dehumanizing posts should be downvoted in order to promote a space where diverse peoples can all feel welcome.

I was on Voat when it was a pleasant community like Lemmy, and I tried to nudge for civility as over time every post became hateful and angry. I would still browse Voat occasionally until it shut down because I value diversity of thought, and I was curious to encounter rhetoric which contradicted my own beliefs.

Lemmy is not so different, however, instead of having a far-right bias Lemmy has a far-left bias. For now there are no far-right Lemmy instances to balance far-left instances like Lemmygrad.ml. This creates an atmosphere where right-leaning, and centrist users might take one look around and feel unwelcome.

I think it is important that left-leaning, centrist, and right-leaning users feel welcome while leaving bigotry at the door. We need for someone who is bigoted to feel welcome here by all of their other traits, and to erode their bigoted beliefs over time because bigotry is not tolerated. I think Lemmy and the Fediverse have real potential to foster a space where diverse users can share stories and form communities with users who hold very different beliefs.

Voat showed it is not enough to create an open platform with unmoderated free speech, the platform itself must have structures in place to promote civility, and the users of the platform must work hard to maintain a culture of civility. The fact that QAnon believers are not welcome here means that Lemmy has already siloed itself, and I believe that the current policy of non-federation with disagreeable instances is too strict to be a long-term viable solution.

My vision for fostering civility on Lemmy is for sublemmies to federate with one another across instances. e.g. /c/pixelart@lemmy.ml could federate freely with /c/pixelart@far-right.com and /c/pixelart@far-left.com to promote relationships between users with very different beliefs. However, /c/politics@lemmy.ml might want to federate much more selectively with /c/politics@far-right.com or /c/politics@far-left.com. Perhaps /c/politics@far-right.com and /c/politics@far-left.com could have a weekly debate post which is the only post that federates between them.