People complaining about the bot are worse than the bot itself. Every comment thread or post about it (probably including this one) inevitably turns into people debating the bot’s usefulness.

If you’re someone who hates the bot, do what everyone has already said 10 trillion times: block it.

All the comment threads and posts by users wanting to “take it down” solve nothing. Just stop. It’s so irritating having to scroll past millions of comments of the same tired debate.

  • Pronell@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    ·
    3 months ago

    I’m always amused at the downvotes it collects. People hammering a button to acknowledge their dislike of something they are choosing to not block.

    My only problem with these bots is that I don’t want them counted toward comments - I hate going in to find the only comments are bots.

    • CM400@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      3 months ago

      My only problem with these bots is that I don’t want them counted toward comments - I hate going in to find the only comments are bots.

      Agreed.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      3 months ago

      Blocking it does not stop it’s misinformation. I’m not opposed to bots or it’s layout in a comment. I’m opposed to having a blatantly biased source masquerading as an unbiased gatekeeper of credibility. You cannot block that.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          20
          ·
          3 months ago

          Their own site. First of all, political scientists don’t use “left center” and “right center.” Because that puts a loaded word first and effectively erases anything after it. Leaving only left and right.

          Second their left/right scheme puts objective facts based reporting in the “left center” category. Organizations like NYT, BBC, WAPO, etc. and in “right center” they’re sneaking in libertarian organizations that want to destroy the federal government and empower corporations in its place. Which gives them credibility they don’t deserve while conveniently painting objective reporting as left wing. They even rated a GOP campaign organization as “right center”. It’s literal political advertisement.

          Third, their credibility ratings are highly subjective and rely on cherry picked evidence. For example NYT and Guardian have similar numbers of failed fact checks. But NYT gets highly credible while Guardian gets mixed. The same level as Breitbart; who has double the number of failed fact checks.

          Really the more you actually check, the worse it gets.