It is probably due to a number of people stopping using their alts after some instance hopping.

Also a few people who came to see how it was, and weren’t attracted enough to become regular visitors.

Curious to see at which number we’ll stabilize.

Next peak will probably happen after either major features release (e.g. exhaustive mod tools allowing reluctant communities to move from Reddit) or the next Reddit fuck up (e.g. removing old.reddit)

Stats on each server: https://lemmy.fediverse.observer/list

  • GoodEye8@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    So as long as they don’t ideologically agree with you it’s acceptable to be toxic towards them, because their “wrong ideology” makes them toxic?

    Are you also aware that most of the proletariats unknowingly uphold capitalism? Considering you say they’re toxic are you against the proletariat or are you a fake socialist trying to create a class divide, the ones who agree with you and the ones who don’t, within the proletariat?

    • silent_water [she/her]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 year ago

      if you asked questions in good faith, you’d know that the community is also aggressively welcoming to such people, even when we disagree. but you don’t so you won’t.

      • GoodEye8@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s bad faith to automatically assume someone being critical is doing it in bad faith.

              • GoodEye8@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Alright, so others are in “bad faith”? How do you know? Just based on one interaction with them?

                  • GoodEye8@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Let’s forget forget about the rest of our discussion and focus solely on the very first response you wrote to me. Based on that response I could’ve applied that same thought process you just described, decided that you’re here in bad faith and respond in the way Hexbear users tend to reply. And all this current discussion wouldn’t have ever happened because based on that response you’d believe I’m here in bad faith and responded in kind. In fact that way no discussion would’ve happened.

                    The way we communicate is prone to errors and misinterpretations. It’s why I’m focusing on your your first response because it’s an excellent example of miscommunication. You used “you” which implies it’s directed at me, but in a later response you clarify that it wasn’t directed at me. Thus discussions require a certain level of benefit of doubt, because it’s actually very easy to misrepresent what was said and just as easy to misinterpret what was said. I gave you that benefit of doubt and we seem to be having a rather civil discussion. And I’ve already somewhat explained what would’ve happened if I hadn’t given it. That benefit of doubt is crucial if you’re wanting to discuss in good faith, because you need to give a chance to correct miscommunications.

                    And that’s why I think the thought process you’ve described is a bad faith thought process, because it doesn’t give the benefit of the doubt. At least that is my general experience with Hexbear users. Someone says something disagreeable in a manner that could be misinterpreted in the way you described and it’s very rare to see a Hexbear user give the benefit of doubt. Instead you see, well everything here. One guy says Hexbear is a cesspool and seemingly only one of you gives him some benefit of doubt, the rest very much troll, antagonize, make snide remarks etc. The vast majority of you responded in the same way you’d claim someone else is responding in bad faith. What if he previously had a miscommunication that Hexbear users didn’t give benefit of the doubt either? He gets piled on in a manner you’ve described as bad faith. With those bad faith responses he now believes you are all acting bad faith, hence the cesspool remark. And what is the response he gets? More bad faith responses from Hexbear users because the vast majority don’t give him any benefit of doubt.

                    You think others act out in bad faith so you respond in bad faith which makes others believe you act in bad faith which prompts more of you to act in bad faith. It’s a a bad faith feedback loop. Genuine question, what’s the goal of such behavior?

    • SmokinStalin [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      Those are good questions that you could get good honest answers to if you wanted. Other hexbearians are much more articulate than me.

      We are aggressively welcoming to anyone who’s genuinely just trying to learn. stalin-approval

    • GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      So as long as they don’t ideologically agree with you it’s acceptable to be toxic towards them, because their “wrong ideology” makes them toxic?

      Think about this in the context of, idk, race science or something. Let’s say you have someone who is openly a big fan of Charles Murray, owns a copy of The Bellcurve, gets the whole nine yards. Would you deny that such a person is necessarily toxic?

      • GoodEye8@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Actually, without any other context, I would. I would label them as misguided. Just because they believe in what I believe as the wrong thing doesn’t mean they’re automatically toxic. If they’re unwilling to even consider alternate perspectives or decide to just be antagonistic then they’re toxic.

        • GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          So if they come in swinging about how they “don’t deny” that black people are genetically less intelligent and say that their opposition is either propagandized or propagandists, that would tilt the scales for you?

          • GoodEye8@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Why would it? If they’re open for discussion there’s clearly something to discuss.

            • GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              1 year ago

              We might be running into a Nazi Bar, paradox of tolerance type issue here. If you treat him that way, there’s a fair chance that he’s just going to use the opportunity to propagandize to whoever will listen.