abcdjdjd

Your point 1 has been my experience and I DO NOT understand why the most upvoted post in this post is saying to have one on ones with every team member on the team and also to have one of ones with related teams. I can't think of a time when that has ever been able to happen, especially on outer teams. Yes, it is ideal. But most teams and people feel like they are too busy all the time and also I have found that if you ask too many questions, sometimes that can be used against you if you don't know the team dynamics at play.

Your point 3 validates that as well.

I feel like this is easier to do as a junior developer than a mid to senior level developer.

Also, I have tried this on a team and one or two would do it but everyone acted like they are too busy. Basically, it was hard to get one on one time to talk to people on the team outside the manager.

Depending on how toxic the job is too, this could be used against you. I don't think it should, but if they expect a mid/senior developer then they could see this as not being senior enough.

How do you handle the above concerns? Both to make people make time for this and also how do you defend against it being used against you? Yes, there is a grace period. But then it feels like even with a grace period, some still find a reason to use it against you.

I don't get the advantage of using supabase or things like it. It feels like you are basically relying on a third party to do the work for you and you are paying them to do it.

Doesn't seem portable at all. If you make your own code, you can move it wherever you want in whatever system you want. It seems like if you use this product, it will get you stuck in that environment and if you need to upgrade, then you are going to have to do the work later on anyways.

What exactly is so great about this product? I'm not saying its bad, I'm just not fully understanding the advantages of using it?

Why would someone want to use this over something like a framework for the backend (that is free) and a database they want and then host it wherever they want? I don't really get why someone who knows how to code would want to pay extra money to build a backend.

Mainly talking about the online conversation around this is hypocritical. Flip the countries around, most twitter accounts support it. Now do it in this direction and twitter accounts are all against it. Its hypocritical in my opinion.

Not speaking necessarily about the people in Mexico City, assuming they didn't immigrate to the USA themselves ever. It would be hypocritical of them though if they did immigrate to the USA at one point and are now complaining about USA citizens immigrating there.

>So...kind of a weird comparison, could be wrong but fair warning, you could catch yourself writing a Youtube comment at any time, any place, without any notice!

Curious, what do you mean by that?

Also, I am mainly speaking about the online conversation around this topic, not so much Mexican citizens in a city. As you say, people can have different opinions on it in that city.

I understand this is a complicated subject with different points of view. I was just posting on here to get what others thought about it.

Ok, but again, there is nothing stopping people from doing this as a group. There is no "magical" structure that comes from a work meeting. A group of people at work can decide to organize something on there own. You are talking about one-on-one stuff, which is different.

>In this case, when someone is being aggressive, I'd just ignore it. Let the market have their say on which product is the better solution without getting into public conflict over it.

While that is nice and all, if someone is actively messing with your rating, that can negatively affect your product from growing regardless of the quality.

There are many example of past products where the "lesser" product won out due to simple weird things like the above. You can't just ignore this stuff all the time. Bigger examples of this happen a lot in tech. Where a large company tries to buy out an idea and if they refuse, they simply make a similar product and then "trash rate" the other product with larger marketing budget and kill it off.

What do you do when you can't ignore it?

>* The business will pay

While possible, I highly doubt getting an even paid for is stopping people from going to do things. If that was the case, restaurants would never be in business.

>* The business will take care of the organizing

Again, same thing. If this was an issue, then restaurants and parks would not exist, people can organize if they really want too.

>* Making it a "work event" gives them slack from family members who might otherwise balk at coworker happy hour

This is possibly the issue, but that sounds like a personal problem for them that they should speak to a therapist about. If they stay after work working longer hours or try to force events to avoid people at their home, then that is there concern and others shouldn't be punished for it. Not to make light of their situation. But people work long hours enough in this country, let people do what they want after work without forcing meetings after work. Which is EXACTLY what these things are, meetings. Anyone who says otherwise, try getting drunk at these meetings and saying whatever you want and see if you still have a job. If it wasn't a meeting, then none of that would matter.

I think your missing the point. If people wanted to talk to each other, they would do that on their own time.

I think maybe ask yourself, why do you need to force this to happen if people really wanted to do this?

If a company can't find time during the day to make time for these meetings, don't expect workers to cut time into there personal lives for these meetings either.

You sound like a stereotypical character from the movie The Office that would probably also tell people "They have the case of the Mondays".

No offense but frankly ignore them. They are either BSing (aka, being brownnoses trying to look like "team players") or possibly don't have lives outside work.

If someone is that eager to have an event outside work, then you should ask yourself why haven't they organized one themselves? Either it is option A (they are just brownnosing and saying what they think you want to hear) or B, 80% of people don't actually want to go out to events and it is really just a loud minority saying it and the others are just agreeing to sound good.

Chances are, you haven't actually asked 80% of your employees. Most likely you heard it second hand from a manager pushing this idea (again, brownnosing or looking for promotion) or you heard it in a group setting where people don't want to be seen as not "team players" and don't say there actual opinion on it.

If you change your policy, don't be shocked if a lot of people start leaving the company for some "unexplained" reason.

>Related note: do it during work hours, if possible.

No, not just IF POSSIBLE, either do them during work hours or don't do them at all. If a company can't make time during work hours to throw an event they are planning, then don't expect your workers to make time for the event after work either.

Ahhh, yes, and you literally just described Section 230 exemptions vs. being a publisher.

Yes, publishers are able to act as publishers and also get held responsible for what they publish. Social media sites are exempt from this under Section 230 rules, but that assumes they are not unfairly moderating their sites and turning into publishers.

Yes, you literally just described what is a publisher and why their abuse of Section 230 law is not ok. You all who are supporting this overmoderation of Reddit seem to want Reddit to be a publisher.

Well, with becoming a publisher and unfairly moderating the site, you lose Section 230 protections. You can't have your cake and eat it too, but that is what Reddit and many of the supporters of overmoderation want to do.

When those mods are literally playing a role in it and removing posts from one side of the political argument, but not the other side, in that discussion then yes they are part of the problem.

Curious, what alternatives have you found that are similar to what reddit used to be (besides this site)? Also, what alternative sites have you found replaced Reddit for you, even if they are not similar to what Reddit once was?

>That alone breaks the dictatorship analogy.

It does not when you factor in their appears to be power mod users who moderate multiple subreddits and have power over most of the site now. Your assumption also assumes that this isn't a site wide issue and going to another subreddit solves this.

Again, the fact that power user mods exist ruins that claim for you. Also, the fact that this power tripping seems to be a norm across much of the site now also shows this is not the case.

Are there still some subs that don't have this abuse? Yes. But is it clear at this point the model that reddit is using is open for abuse and eventually it seems many (if not most) subreddits eventually fall into this abuse problem? Yes.

I have left reddit mostly at this point as well, with some exceptions with some subreddits. The entire site is garbage at this point and filled with groupthink and mod abuse at this point.

I'm curious, what alternative sites have you found at this point, besides this one, that seem to have what Reddit used to be? Or maybe even if it isn't exactly what reddit used to be, at least some good alternative for sites to go to now?

Sorry, but this argument is the same reason that dictatorships fails endlessly throughout history.

Sure, you can make an argument that maybe the leaders (in this case mods) will be benevolent and lead fairly and for the betterment of all efficiently. After all, dictatorships are more "efficient" at getting stuff done than democracy (note, not saying GOOD is done, just more efficient when you don't have to consider others concerns but your own).

However, reality is that is never seems to play out that way. Even if it plays out that way for a little while, someone always inevitably joins the higher ranks and abuses that power for their own interests and selfishness.

The same reason this fails in countries is the same reason it fails in online communities where the content is community created. Eventually, someone joins the moderator ranks (if they aren't already their) and starts pushing their own agenda when it comes to removing posts or locking posts.

I think reddit has crossed over into this stage of things on most subreddits at this point. It is clearly a cultural issue with the admins who seem to encourage this behavior, as well as no way for the user base to have any recourse against this abuse of mod power.

Thus, you get endless censorship now on most subreddits now, and no more open discussion on topics where USERS actually get to decide what they get to read or comment on. After all, what is the point of an upvote/downvote button if mods can just override it endlessly and often do?

>Moderators have a lot of power to influence conversations on Reddit in non-obvious ways.

You had the above quote when I was commenting on your post, but may have edited it out. But I think this line right here is also why reddit is becoming unusable and going downhill fast.

Basically, moderators are given way too much power and users have no recourse against mod abuse really. Users can't vote a moderator out for example. Many times, mod abuse is also hidden, so you can't see a log of what they have been removing and hiding. Both of these things would show clear mod abuse in the open, but reddit seems to want to hide this.

Moderators should really only have the power to remove illegal stuff or have clear rules linked for each removal or ban.

Mods should not be able to turn on "filter" features that auto hide or auto delete posts, as they regularly just use it to target posters or topics they don't like, even if it is still on topic and popular in the subreddit.

Also, mods are more and more removing or locking posts mainly because they politically disagree with them. They use excuses or hide this corrupting behavior all the time. Many times a lock posts will be done with a claim "its too hard to keep moderating this post", when reality is they were just removing posts that didn't break rules and were posts the mod simply disagreed with.

Add all the above and more and combine it with clear corrupt interests, and you basically ruin what reddit once was. Which was a place to go to free discussion on many topics. It is not longer that. It is just a place where mods basically abuse their power on most subreddits and astroturfing is more and more the norm.

Its almost like people forgot their was a an upvote and downvote button. The mods really have no reason removing posts, outside of clear violating posts that may break laws, since the users can choose what they want to see with the upvote and downvote button.

So, I get that and its a general advice you can find in win friends and influence people type books.

The problem is, what if you have no one to say "yes" to? What if you live in an area where everyone is getting married, having families, and generally either doesn't socialize outside that or has closed nit groups?

Sure, say yes to everything. But, what happens if you have nothing to say yes too?

I honestly don't know how to make friends anymore. I am in early 30s, program for a living, I don't like bars or loud places for reasons that would make sense if I explained them but don't want to go into full details here, and generally like sarcastic people who can have a discussion about topics and not just repeat what they have been told by headlines or what social media tells them to believe.

I mean, yes, they can have the same opinions of course, but they should be able to at least say why they believe those things.

Also, doesn't help I moved around a lot as an only child, so its almost like I missed out on "education" of keeping long term friendships.

I've tried seeking therapy for it, but can't seem to get anyone to really help me with this, since I guess they see someone who can hold a normal conversation with them, a job, and other stuff and don't get what the issue is.

I guess the odd thing is I can hold down conversations with people at work and if I get to know someone no problem. Problem is getting to know people and making connections with people who I like. Just can't really relate to many people it feels like, probably due to my unique upbringing as a child.

I have a girlfriend as well, but it just feels like we don't connect for the above reasons. Sort of wish I had a gilfriend that was goal oriented, sarcastic, and had similar interest as me. But, frankly, never seen anyone out there like that. Probably will end up marrying her and wondering if I eventually get a divorce down the line.

Feel like I would make more connections with people in a higher educated part of the country, probably near some ivy league schools or something. Although I know that sounds stuck up as hell to say, but I just would love to talk with people who can actually think for themselves, be sarcastic, and be interesting enough to bounce conversations off of.

Don't know how to solve my issues and I guess nor do therapists. Don't know why I am even posting this here I guess. Maybe on the off chance someone reads it and is able to help somehow.

>As such, could you really say that is working long hours such is really unhealthy? Or such a terrible thing?

Yes, yes it is. It sounds like you are simply using work as a distraction from your problems instead of addressing them.

Our society is becoming more and more disconnected as everyone is working way too much. We should be working less, not more.

Less work means people can spend more time doing things they enjoy, socializing, doing things they need to do outside work, and having more time to relax and probably sleep.

HINTS why I said THEY SHOULD BE handled that way, did you read my post?

Sorry, but I think you are being highly disingenuous. An ACTUAL equivalency would be a phone company throwing you off their phone system, while colluding with other phone companies and tech companies (not even related to the phone service) to also simultaneously ban you from using their services. Also, this is clearly politically targeted, while using words that hide this. Otherwise, please explain to me how all of them just up and decided to do this at once?

We as a society have said that is not ok for phone companies to do. Why are we making exceptions for what is now services that are holding a large portion, if not the majority, of online sites and services at this time?

Also, what evidence has been presented of illegal activity on this app and proof they were not following Section 230 law and refusing to remove it? How were they handling things differently from Twitter (or any social media site for that matter), who also has these problems with their service, and why is Twitter still able to be up? No, I don't mean AWS claims they weren't doing it. I want to know actual evidence. If the post exists, their should be screenshots of them still up now, no?

At this point, cloud services have gotten so large that they probably need to be regulated at this point as a public utility is.

To say AWS is the same as a rental/tenant relationship is laughable. If it was, there would be millions of different cloud services one could go to and this would be a non-issue. But, it clearly isn't close to the same.

Also, if illegal activity is being done (and this stuff was handled like a public utility, as frankly that is the size of these cloud services at this point), then that needs to be handled in a court of law.

To be honest, don't. People want to tell others about the great websites and it ALWAYS ends up ruining things. Reddit is going downhill major time and it is simply because it got popular, thus more of the population joined. Which magically lead to lowering of the content and also agendas being pushed (because it is popular, there is more motivation to do that). Even happens to quality subreddits as well.