Recently we’ve been seeing some pretty obvious spam, which I & others have been clearing out, but there’s also been simple link posts to articles that aren’t quite spam yet don’t have any body text to suggest what the intent is. Presumably to start a conversation, but I’d like people’s input here before I make any firm decisions on the matter.
Would you prefer that we require link posts to have some additional body text to better start conversations, or disallow link posts in favor of the relevant links being only in the body text (i.e. what you’re reading now) that more clearly starts & guides the conversation? Or something else?
Let me know in the replies and I’ll adjust the rules accordingly and make a new locked/pinned post to make these changes more apparent.
Yes I feel that some context with a linked post is mandatory. Besides risking malware or scams, a bare minimum should be required when posting. Just a link isn’t enough.
I think having some text should be required. Maybe start out with required body text but link posts still allowed, then if there are still issues with low effort posts change to links in body text only.
Dropping a link with no context is the very definition of “low effort” and those should be removed or downvoted. Here’s an article, here’s a video…ok…why do I care? Why is it relevant? What’s good about it?
If you sent the link to your friend in a text, what would you tell them? What makes it worth sharing?
I really wish this was thought about universally. Half of the stuff in the big “news” and “technology” communities seems like it’s just posted mindlessly with no context. It completely missed the point of having a community where you share content…not just post content.
Appreciation for all of the moderators and users making Lemmy great ❤️
Personally I like to see articles posted in the body with the link added. Sometimes the sites are paywalled or I dont want to give them the traffic or the article itself is garbage or sensationalized .
Given this community is General Discussion, I think it should be required for submitters to put forth their own text to start said discussion. I think allowing link posts is fine but OP must include text in the post describing what the link is and what they think about it.
Strongly in favour of requiring context when posting a link!
title + link + body(opinion)
make that a rule, like “if link, add opinion, else delete/warning…”
Fully in favor of links requiring context / summary / transcript, something substantial.
I’d agree. Some sort of text to accompany the link is welcome, but I don’t think it’s necessary to fully block link posts
I’m not a big fan either of the drive-by link posts. Most places I’ve been subscribed to elsewhere usually had a rule to make some effort in including a summary or opinion and not a blank text field.
I guess I’m a dissenting vote, but I’m in the “it depends” camp. Sometimes there really isn’t a reason to add body text - the link is to an article that is a pretty clear point of discussion. Other times, the article itself is sort of a “so what” unless you explain what the discussion point is. I personally should encourage but not require body text.
Are you only looking for feedback from users on your instance or any subscriber?
Are you only looking for feedback from users on your instance or any subscriber?
Any subscribers tbh, as this would affect everyone following/subbed to the community.
Some description or other context for the link posts would be awesome. I am not against forcing all links into the body text but I can see that being possibly undesirable for some mobile users.
If I were originally from Alabama and I was all evangelical about Lemmy, I’d shout “Praise the lawdy lawdy.” I’m from Maine, so I’ll just say, “Ayuh.” The question is really difficult, but I think the best approach is to require link posts that have some additional body text that inspires conversation. I mean, if the body has nothing to do with the link, it’s a sham.
