This is an opportunity for any users, server admins, or interested third parties to ask anything they'd like to @nutomic@lemmy.ml and I about Lemmy. This includes its development and future, as well as wider issues relevant to the social media landscape today.
Note: This will be the thread tmrw, so you can use this thread to ask and vote on questions beforehand.
If anyone considers themselves a historian and thinks anything is unbiased, their experience and insight will be dubious at best. Understanding that everyone has a distinct worldview and therefore bias is literally high-school history class, years before History 101. Do they think reddit.com, or any reddit alternative for that matter, is unbiased or neutral??
Not only is it irrelevant in context (FOSS, forkable, the devs in question only moderate this single instance), it's especially unreasonable coming from /r/AskHistorians. They of all people should be able to understand bias, context and causation. If anything, this bias is just a guarantee that they won't sell out and extort the userbase.
Yeah this. No association is implied just by using open source software. You don't have to agree with Richard Stallman to use GNU utils, nor linus torvalds to use linux, it doesn't make you suspect politically, it's just software.
If you don't wanna be associated with communists then don't use a communist instance (hexbear, lemmygrad), that's fine. even if they don't make their own instance they can pick and choose their associations. Frankly, being associated with reddit is far worse than being associated with commies.
Because real historians aren’t the ones using r/ask historians and answering on there
You don't know anything about r/AH do you?
I’ve read the posts. They are almost all very obviously unreaserched and unknowledgeable answers that no real historian would ever spew
What are you talking about? It is BY FAR the subreddit with the most consistently throughly cited responses. Comments get removed even just for not having sources.
You are not talking about the same subreddit, please check yourself. Or maybe provide some citations of your own if you're going to say that content of that caliber is "unresearched". I mean who the heck are you??
Yeah but if allows awful sources for one. I’ve seen absolutely trash sources being the only thing on top questions. You can go through there yourself and see the ridiculousness of the answers on the subreddit. It’s awful. It’s very clear that the answers aren’t by actual historians as any education in it at all would make people see how awful the answers that get upvoted so very often are