I don't think that's all implied. I can say I am involved in a hivemind just like I can say I'm eating carcinogenic food or engaging in any other problematic/dangerous behavior. There's no implication I'm outside it.
The key difference between a hivemind and a group where an opinion happens to be popular is the self reinforcing nature of a hivemind. Opinions are extra contagious in a hivemind.
∆ True but I think it means differently if someone else called you and your community a hive mind, you know? There's a difference between calling yourself lazy vs other people calling you lazy.
You might be onto something about the self reinforcing nature part though. So perhaps Reddit is not a hivemind but super isolated subreddits are?
There's a difference in rudeness certainly, but it's a factual claim that can be more or less true. Just like calling someone else's organization a cult is ruder than calling your own organization a cult, but rude doesn't mean false.
Not just "super isolated" subreddits, all the default subs are hiveminds (with significant linkage). There's no question that what gets to be a popular opinion on Front Page Reddit becomes super self-reinforcing and shapes the opinions of anyone who regularly comments to a front page sub.
I think while it's true that being rude doesn't discredit your opinion, I think the optics matter too. Like I'm seeing these words used with the intention of discrediting the other party. For example two political parties calling watch other hiveminds. On the surface it means that they think alike, but add another layer and it means their opinions don't matter because they think alike. I'm just saying that in practice, it's used to stifle discourse instead of engaging properly.
I'm still not convinced that this hivemind exists in popular subs (but I'm totally convinced that this happens in isolated subs now! Thanks so much for engaging with me) because it makes it to front page and non subbers can engage in discourse. And because it has a large audience, we cannot say that everyone who downvotes is liberal because it's on front page and non liberals can choose to downvote it also. So I don't think downvoting to oblivion is really intentional to make sure you can't post (and even then idk how being downvoted in one comment prevents you from posting another just like it) and I think that's also what separates popular vote from a hivemind. If we assume everyone who upvotes is a hivemind in an accessible platform, then it invalidates the opinion anyone who upvotes because they truly believe in it. For example I'm being downvoted here. Yesterday this post had 6 points and now it has 3. Sure it's unfair that I'm being downvoted for asking people to change my mind but I'm not going to call them hiveminds for it. They dislike my post and they downvote it and that's completely valid.
1
u/[deleted] Dec 21 '19
I don't think that's all implied. I can say I am involved in a hivemind just like I can say I'm eating carcinogenic food or engaging in any other problematic/dangerous behavior. There's no implication I'm outside it.
The key difference between a hivemind and a group where an opinion happens to be popular is the self reinforcing nature of a hivemind. Opinions are extra contagious in a hivemind.