• laverabe@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    I figured most people here knew about it, but also just as many probably forgot about it, at least deep in the memory banks. ;)

    • pwnicholson@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 day ago

      Your explanation says that a post with 100k actually has 20k. What this guy is saying is that it does actually have 100k.

      • laverabe@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        It’s impossible really to say. This was their official code citation:

        Over the past few months, we have carefully recomputed historical votes on posts and comments to remove outdated, unnecessary rules.

        I mean on the face of it, maybe they were telling the truth?

        But they are a for profit corporation, and that year forward was when the enshittification really began. I guess I just have little reason to believe that they didn’t just alter the algorithm to make it look like there was more engagement than there was.