So from a Kantian ethical point of view, it doesn't really work. There ought to be a better solution. But on a personal level, I wholeheartedly agree
So from a Kantian ethical point of view, it doesn't really work. There ought to be a better solution. But on a personal level, I wholeheartedly agree
I saw the link to this article in my RSS feed, and I took the time to open a browser, find the link, and comment because RSS adoption is something that I genuinely want to have a conversation about.
Which means that with RSS, you can still be a part of the community, you just won't reflexively upvote or spend time in the comments section.
Sometimes an uninteresting website has a very interesting article. This is specially great for supper niche stuff. An empty feed should not draw much attention in a reader. The single comment posted years later could be really useful.
There is also <comment> https://validator.w3.org/feed/docs/rss2.html#ltcommentsgtSub...
Using wsb as an example, you used to see quality posts with 20 upvotes then the 2020s roll around, bots and scrawlers started inflating the needed numbers and even with thousand of upvotes, some posts were blatant ads after wsb proved it had alot of wealthy eyes.
The main pages of reddit have the same problems full of bots that flood into selected posts almost immediately after it gets posted, this is especially obvious during election years, where billions are burned to "let us discover what the popular concensus is".