1. Exclude explicit software bugginess or missing features
  2. Include experiences or knock-on effects that may have arisen from (1)
  3. Comparisons to Reddit are ok. We know the reasons for the differences, but this is just about expressing yourself
      • cmat273@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s not really what I was referring to. Sure it selects posts automatically but it’s not like it picks what it thinks a specific user is going to click on.

        • nave@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I think the original commenter was referring to how Reddit was able to balance popular communities and smaller ones instead of the fire hose of memes and tech news Lemmy is.

      • BlueÆther@no.lastname.nz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        but it is just a simple vote count/time decay, no consideration given to what you have interacted with in the past, ie the “algorithm” on other platforms

        • dan@upvote.au
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s why the content isn’t sorted as well as it could be. There’s no one-size-fits-all for social media as people have different things they like.

    • CoderKat@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Yes there is, and it’s not that different from reddit. The sorting algorithm is what they refer to. Eg, hot is some balance of time vs votes, which greatly favours newer posts (too new, IMO – posts it shows will typically no comments or maybe just one or two). Active favours high commenting rates and based on my observations, it seems to drop off around 2 days (too old, IMO – a considerable number of posts shown by this algorithm seem to be around the 2 day mark). The top and new algorithms are straightforward enough.

      All the algorithms favour big communities. There’s a “best” algorithm in development, which would try to look at the top for each community and thus give smaller communities a chance. I can’t wait for that, because right now, you’ll rarely if ever see a small community hit the front page and it sucks bad.