By 'attack' or do you mean engaging in well sourced arguments against your assertions? And by the way we have plenty of market socialists amount our numbers

[–] Noughmad@programming.dev 9 points 1 year ago

I actually don't know, neither happened so far. Let's find out.

[–] Surface_Detail@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

No. They do not.

[–] astral_avocado@lemm.ee -2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I was told me another hexbear that essentially you guys don't believe in good faith debate on public forums, hence all the insufferable shitposting and trolling.

[–] LinkedinLenin@hexbear.net 20 points 1 year ago

I'm sure there's probably a few Hexbear users that think that, but as far as I can tell it's the minority. Maybe I'm wrong

In any case, there's a lot of us who prefer to interact in good faith. Personally that's why I left Reddit years ago, because people there are too at each other's throats instead of interested in finding common ground and developing ideas.

[–] Egon@hexbear.net 5 points 1 year ago

I can't really speak for a site - it's users are not a monolith - but the general culture is that you are not owed a good faith discussion , if you clearly aren't interested in one. If you look you'll notice that when people ask questions they get them asnwered, but when they try to make gochas or they get embroiled in an argument, but then don't respect the other well enough to respond to their queries, then it turns into shotposting. And why wouldn't it? Why would I wanna spend energy validating some doofus that's pretty obviously just trying to troll? Why would I validate someone's opinion on something they obviously know nothing about, when I've shared sources and knowledge which they then disregard in order to continue knowing nothing?