• Lvxferre@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      6 hours ago

      In this context it is - it means that the user saw how Reddit used to be, and is likely informed enough to have a good guess on what’s going on.

      (Some accounts there are 12, 13, even 15yo.)

      • zante@lemmy.wtf
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 hours ago

        It’s all speculation and it been going on forever.

        Every single every example is “hey has any anyone else noticed” With some speculation about the algorithm. No one knows anything, but it’s presented here fact.

        Where’s your critical thinking ?

        All I’m asking is for something a bit better than “I swear it’s true bro my cousin works at Nintendo”

        • eskimofry@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 hours ago

          You’re argument is that humans can’t discern patterns from noise?

          If you were on reddit even for a brief period of time you can actually click through to reddit and see that the experience has changed.

          People who want extraordinary evidence think that the claim is extraordinary but never question whether their own understanding is limited.

          • zante@lemmy.wtf
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            58 minutes ago

            If requiring something more than “Hmmm seems strange” from a handful of Redditors is somehow “extraordinary evidence” to you - then yes, that’s what’s required to give this anecdote - offered to us as fact - a bit of credibility.

            It’s not a big ask, and I didn’t expect you have such obvious difficulties, but there you go.