THE QUESTION
Why do people like filter bubbles?
Spend your stickers on what matters most. An idea with evidence can take a held seat.
closed · back to Actions
Viewing as guest. Enter a handle to join and take part.
Your sticker budget
One per idea, 7 total. Floor is one vote.
5 places are held for overlooked ideas — nominate one with a link, and it counts once 2 people agree the source is relevant.
why
At stage close one nominee enters by random draw and the rest by nomination count, at most one per stakeholder class. A model checks only whether the page is about the same subject — never whether it proves the claim. That judgement is the room's, and a nomination nobody else stands behind takes no seat.
People I know now live in two different versions of the same country
cluster 1
Nothing said yet.
CLUSTER 1
People I know now live in two different versions of the same country
12 votesin focus ↑ · close ✕
Being wrong in front of people you know is worse than being wrong
Meaning the ordinary user, not the committed activist.
3 votesdiscuss
CLUSTER 2
People choose the sources that already agree with them
15 votesdiscuss
Correcting someone publicly makes them dig in harder
To be precise: this is about incentives, not anyone's character.
3 votesdiscuss
CLUSTER 3
Every platform is a private space that behaves like a public one
I would want evidence before I would call this a cause myself.
0 votesdiscuss
Public broadcasters are treated as one side rather than a floor
Scope: mainstream platforms, not niche forums.
0 votesdiscuss
NOT CLUSTERED
Twenty years ago the same complaint was made about television
0 votesdiscuss
Everyone assumes the other side is more extreme than it is
I would want evidence before I would call this a cause myself.
7 votesdiscuss
Nobody agrees on who should decide what is true
I mean this as an observation, not a proposal.
0 votesdiscussing (1)
Platforms are where politics happens, but nobody elected them
Scope: mainstream platforms, not niche forums.
0 votes
↳ nominated for a seat: https://example.org/ops-incident-review.pdf could not read it (HTTPError) 1 of 2 behind it
discussNobody trusts a correction if it comes from the other side
Narrower than it reads: this is about national politics only.
0 votesdiscussing (1)
Subscription walls put good reporting behind a price and left the rest free
4 votesdiscuss
Reach is sold, so the loudest account is not the most representative
0 votesdiscuss
Certainty is more comfortable than accuracy, and cheaper
0 votesdiscuss
The same event is reported as two different events
To be precise: this is about incentives, not anyone's character.
1 votesdiscuss
Local newspapers closed and nothing replaced them
1 votesdiscuss
Local life is thinner, so national politics fills the space
0 votesdiscuss
Where you live now predicts what you believe better than anything else
0 votesdiscuss
Schools do not teach how to read a source
To be precise: this is about incentives, not anyone's character.
0 votesdiscuss
The word 'misinformation' has become a way to dismiss people
1 votesdiscuss
Being informed is expensive in time and nobody budgets for it
0 votesdiscuss
Cheap sincerity beats expensive accuracy, and always has
0 votesdiscuss
The people most online are the least representative
0 votesdiscuss
Political parties benefit from the split and have no reason to fix it
I mean this as an observation, not a proposal.
0 votesdiscuss
People no longer meet anyone who disagrees with them in person
To be precise: this is about incentives, not anyone's character.
5 votesdiscuss
Disagreeing in public costs you socially, so most people stop
Scope: mainstream platforms, not niche forums.
12 votesdiscuss
Ranking optimises for time spent, not for being informed
Scope: mainstream platforms, not niche forums.
14 votesdiscuss
The feeling of being lied to came first; the bubbles came after
Scope: mainstream platforms, not niche forums.
0 votesdiscuss
Regulation moves in years and the products change in weeks
I mean this as an observation, not a proposal.
0 votesdiscuss
The people building this were not asked whether it should exist
0 votesdiscuss
There is no shared set of facts to argue from any more
To be precise: this is about incentives, not anyone's character.
2 votesdiscuss
Arguments online end in blocking, not in agreement
7 votesdiscuss
Moderation happens after the reach has already happened
5 votesdiscuss
Half the accounts arguing about this are not people
Narrower than it reads: this is about national politics only.
0 votesdiscuss
Ad money rewards volume of attention, not quality of it
13 votesdiscuss
It is not a bubble; most people are simply not interested in politics at all
Scope: mainstream platforms, not niche forums.
1 votesdiscuss
There is no button anywhere that says 'show me what I am missing'
0 votesdiscuss
Recommendation systems are not inspectable from outside
6 votesdiscuss
We measure engagement because it is easy to measure, not because it matters
1 votesdiscuss
A newsroom now costs more than the advertising it can sell
5 votesdiscuss
Working from home removed the last place people argued across lines
0 votesdiscuss
Nobody has ever shown that shared facts produced agreement, even when we had them
0 votesdiscuss
The problem is not what people believe but that believing has become an identity
11 votesdiscuss
The cheapest content to make is content about other content
I mean this as an observation, not a proposal.
0 votesdiscuss
The institutions that used to arbitrate lost their authority for their own reasons
0 votesdiscuss
A feed has no edges, so you cannot tell what you are not seeing
11 votesdiscuss
Loneliness makes online belonging worth more than accuracy
0 votesdiscuss
Outrage travels further than accuracy, so it is what gets made
Scope: mainstream platforms, not niche forums.
5 votesdiscuss
We remember the claim and forget that it was corrected
0 votesdiscuss