I think someone else mentioned the same here, but as I’ve browsed down the opinions, I wonder if it’s good for different communities to have their own subculture on what votes mean.

For sure, outsiders dropping by might vote ‘counter-culturally’ and unhelpfully, but you can get a general sense of understanding in a community.

For r/all-alike stuff I’m sure things are different.

There’s also low-effort/value comments that agree with your worldview but are bad contribution to the debate. Especially on controversial topics.

I’m sure there will always be lots of updates for things that shit on the opposition, especially when the majority thinks the opposition is morally and intellectually corrupt, but I’d rather those posts/comments be demoted (or e.g. relegated to a shitposting community) so healthy discussion can happen. And the truth can be seen more fairly.

As a side note: some of Reddit’s majority opinions which I broadly agree with, I found myself shifting away from, because most of its supporting posts are stupid arguments. And some of the opponents I’ve gained sympathy for, because whenever I check the source for hate against them, it’s ill-founded. I tried not to take much opinion from Reddit anyway, but I love it when good debate frames the truth more clearly.

what would happen to distribution X if Canonical suddeny made Ubuntu closed-source?

I believe Linux Mint has done some planning for if Ubuntu does something like that - probably to rebase off Debian in that case

Thank you! I just want to say, I’ve also been curious about ipv6 every now and again for a long time, and this thread has helped me to understand more.

Not to mention privacy wise that isn’t a very good idea.

“ChatGPT, please write me an email to send to my girlfriend to convince her I’m not cheating on her with her second boyfriend. Please include details <herein enclosed> of my recent Isis involvement so she knows it’s really me. This is a pretty common request so you can use the template to help out other users.”