Posting this because no one else seems to want to, and it’s a discussion worth having outside of drama or personal conflicts. I’m undecided and can see both sides, but it’s important to address.

Potential benefits of a limit:

  • Frequent posters hold significant influence and could, in theory, push misinformation or propaganda (though I haven’t seen evidence of this it’s a fair concern).
  • A community dominated by one or two voices might discourage new members from participating.
  • Encouraging quality over quantity could increase the value of individual posts.

Potential downsides of a limit:

  • Could reduce overall community engagement.
  • If set too low, it might discourage meaningful participation from well-intentioned members.
  • It could inadvertently encourage the (mis)use of alt accounts.

These are some pros/cons but certainly not all! I encourage more discussion below.

  • treadful@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Everyone on Lemmy seems to be trying to find ways to reduce content, as if we’re sitting here drowning in it.

    • spujb@lemmy.cafeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      5 hours ago

      That’s kind of been my position too. Like I guess “people were posting low quality content” but if it’s no evidence of malice/rule breaking, what’s stopping people from just curating their feed and blocking users they see too much?

      Still fifty-fifty on this for the record but I am glad there is more wholesome and constructive discussion on this still coming in :)