This doesn’t fit any definition of the word “slop”. Slop in the cultural sense is low quality content that is low quality and meaningless. Slop in the literal sense means food that you feed to pigs or live stock. Slop in the sidebar definition says “anonymous” “bullshit”; Anonymous means that you don’t know who it is; bullshit means low impact, meaningless, empty.
It seems disrespectful to the people impacted to call it “slop”. You wrote in the title that it’s an official government action. There have been people already deported for criticizing Israel. There will be more people who are going to be deported for criticizing Israel. If you spoke to them and they told you about their deportation, would you say to them that it’s slop?
I don’t think that slop is a bad comm. I think that slop is a fine comm for posting slop, ie bad posts by twitter users or redditors, absurd reactionary things which are mostly inconsequential.
I think that news stories which have real world material impact should be posted in news or politics. Gossip would be like things said by a public figure without direct material impact. Like if Marco Rubio expresses his own opinions, it could be considered gossip. Official government policy said by one of the most powerful government officials is newsworthy.
My personal test for whether I post something in the slop comm is whether I could explain the post to a stranger in public. You could walk up to a stranger in public and say “Marco Rubio wants to deport immigrants who criticize Israel” and they would know what you are talking about. If you walk up to a stranger in public and say “These lemmy.world posters says that anti-war activists should have voted for Kamala to stop the genocide”, a stranger won’t know what lemmy world is, then it’s slop.
absurd reactionary things which are mostly inconsequential
Unfortunately there is not a clear demarcation and I don’t see much value in trying to seperate them
Yesterday’s steamer calling for fascism is tomorrow’s US political leader, and the absurb reactionary things being posted will be used to justify crimes against humanity
The only thing I care less about than whether something is directly consequential or indirectly and possibly not consequential is the allocation of those posts to two seperate communities created because of some bizarre mod clique about shit that doesn’t matter (not the name, which matters in a symbolic way, but having two communities)
And now I should disengage because I’ve written too much about something I ostensibly don’t care about
This doesn’t fit any definition of the word “slop”. Slop in the cultural sense is low quality content that is low quality and meaningless. Slop in the literal sense means food that you feed to pigs or live stock. Slop in the sidebar definition says “anonymous” “bullshit”; Anonymous means that you don’t know who it is; bullshit means low impact, meaningless, empty.
It seems disrespectful to the people impacted to call it “slop”. You wrote in the title that it’s an official government action. There have been people already deported for criticizing Israel. There will be more people who are going to be deported for criticizing Israel. If you spoke to them and they told you about their deportation, would you say to them that it’s slop?
Yeah it’s a stupid community title, you reckon the gossip one is better?
I don’t think that slop is a bad comm. I think that slop is a fine comm for posting slop, ie bad posts by twitter users or redditors, absurd reactionary things which are mostly inconsequential.
I think that news stories which have real world material impact should be posted in news or politics. Gossip would be like things said by a public figure without direct material impact. Like if Marco Rubio expresses his own opinions, it could be considered gossip. Official government policy said by one of the most powerful government officials is newsworthy.
My personal test for whether I post something in the slop comm is whether I could explain the post to a stranger in public. You could walk up to a stranger in public and say “Marco Rubio wants to deport immigrants who criticize Israel” and they would know what you are talking about. If you walk up to a stranger in public and say “These lemmy.world posters says that anti-war activists should have voted for Kamala to stop the genocide”, a stranger won’t know what lemmy world is, then it’s slop.
Good distinction
It’s news if it’s a chud in the white house or congress, it’s slop if it’s a chud streamer or some other terminally online shit
Unfortunately there is not a clear demarcation and I don’t see much value in trying to seperate them
Yesterday’s steamer calling for fascism is tomorrow’s US political leader, and the absurb reactionary things being posted will be used to justify crimes against humanity
The only thing I care less about than whether something is directly consequential or indirectly and possibly not consequential is the allocation of those posts to two seperate communities created because of some bizarre mod clique about shit that doesn’t matter (not the name, which matters in a symbolic way, but having two communities)
And now I should disengage because I’ve written too much about something I ostensibly don’t care about