“site:reddit.com” saves the day, but I feel very uneasy doing so ever since they did their nasty API + demodding ploy.
Unfortunately, none of the alternatives capture or even understand the point of reddit. They focus on secondary features like decentralization, when the primary appeal of reddit is the network of communities (that are, furthermore, properly threaded, moderated forums) at the same place, using the same format, accessed with a single user identity.
In fact, precisely this aspect of reddit is what made it accumulate so much genuine information, and the reason it has replaced raw Google search for many kinds of questions. (well, it is definitely not the horrible facebook-post-like-with-no-discussion functionality they have been pushing forever).
It really is one of the most unfortunate things of the modern internet. :(
I think there's a good degree of pseudo-intellectualism on the site. Not necessarily in the conduct, but in claims of knowledge and the certainty they present it with.
There was a period in my life I've been active on Reddit myself. Looking back on that period in my life, I presented many strong and celebrated opinions there without much basis in reality. I'm not beyond blame for this, just stating an observation.
From my perspective, Reddit works as a validation machine, where validation is given somewhat randomly. It's like a self-service bias entrenching device. So perhaps it's natural to see pseudo-intellectual content there written by people such as my younger self.
To me, "good" means quite high quality. Like an expert sharing their thoughts in their niche. If you wish to use these thoughts, they will be very reliable and correct.
If you consider "good" to be anything that is not "bad" or "harmful", then I would be more inclined to agree with you.
My niche of tech is full of hobbyists and enthusiasts who want to participate in it - it's a part of the video games industry. And there is a very large amount of misleading knowledge on Reddit. Of course, even misleading knowledge can push people generally in the right direction, so I don't see the discourse as harmful. But I also don't see it as of particularly high quality. It might be "good" on some terms, or "neutral" on others.
With hockey skates - I'm not an expert. But I would expect that the recommendation on Reddit won't have to do with materials, blade quality, ankle support, footbeds, tongue design, heat moldability, weight distribution, holders and runners, energy transfer, foot health features and similar things that you could find on expert forums. I would expect that the recommendation would be based on entry-level things, like what feels good, or what brand is popular. This is not to say that this advice has no value. There is value. But they might not consider how materials might limit skill growth, how there is a knowledge gap in fit assessment in most new skaters, or how different skates protect the skater's feet from injury.
There is value in some advice, just not enough to consider it "good", in my opinion. Others might have different opinions.
I vehemently disagree. Check something like: https://old.reddit.com/r/Games/comments/ug0ii6/digital_found...