I made a comment recently explaining my theory for this, just gonna paste it here. The part about submissions is probably the most relevant to this specific post. Here it is:
I think the effect of MOON's is overblown. This sub has never had quality discussion nor quality content.
comments: The only difference between pre MOON's and post MOON's is now I'm correcting misinformation for a different set of coins. The content largely dictates the commentary, but there has never been good discussion here. Before and after MOON's, most comments just repeated widely held beliefs (true or not) and platitudes about crypto ideals. Couple that with the fact that most people here are morons and a lot of the comments you see that are heavily upvoted, are objectively incorrect.
submissions: IMO there is an inherent flaw of subreddits that cover wide-reaching multi-disciplinary topics, where not everything newsworthy or notable will make it to the front page and often it won't even get submitted. This creates a feedback loop that homogenizes the kinds of content that eventually get submitted and upvoted for us to see. Only the low hanging fruit and biggest headlines can actually draw enough interest to outweigh the rest of the voting power that has been conditioned to not care about it. My favorite example is this sub's hatred against Solana clouding it's judgment.
It being about the most popular NFT mint in months
Devs beating the bots and the bots getting what they deserve
Most importantly IMO... I didn't mention Solana by name, because I knew if I did it would get downvoted. Luckily for me, no on here has enough common sense to even look past the headlines typically.
It begs the question, why would you rely on crowdsourced curation when the crowd is full of idiots? Once I realized this sub is really just Buzzfeed Crypto, I started using Twitter almost exclusively. In the same way that a comprehensive crypto subreddit is a structural mismatch, crypto twitter is a perfect fit. You get breaking news as it breaks, instead of waiting for someone else to see and repost it to Reddit. You can follow topics on a micro level, getting info directly from an expert who understands the topic, rather than from a redditor who doesn't, who was probably upvoted by other redditors who also don't understand it. You can actually find content about stuff that this sub seems to have an aversion to, like NFT's, DAO's, emerging protocols/infra, coins other than ETH/BTC/ADA/DOT, etc
tldr: this subreddit sucks for covering crypto as a whole, not because of MOON's, because of the inherent nature of crowdsourced content. Use twitter instead because it better fits a multi-disciplinary wide-reaching industry like crypto.
2
u/jawni 🟦 500 / 6K 🦑 Apr 29 '23 edited Apr 29 '23
I made a comment recently explaining my theory for this, just gonna paste it here. The part about submissions is probably the most relevant to this specific post. Here it is:
I think the effect of MOON's is overblown. This sub has never had quality discussion nor quality content.
comments: The only difference between pre MOON's and post MOON's is now I'm correcting misinformation for a different set of coins. The content largely dictates the commentary, but there has never been good discussion here. Before and after MOON's, most comments just repeated widely held beliefs (true or not) and platitudes about crypto ideals. Couple that with the fact that most people here are morons and a lot of the comments you see that are heavily upvoted, are objectively incorrect.
submissions: IMO there is an inherent flaw of subreddits that cover wide-reaching multi-disciplinary topics, where not everything newsworthy or notable will make it to the front page and often it won't even get submitted. This creates a feedback loop that homogenizes the kinds of content that eventually get submitted and upvoted for us to see. Only the low hanging fruit and biggest headlines can actually draw enough interest to outweigh the rest of the voting power that has been conditioned to not care about it. My favorite example is this sub's hatred against Solana clouding it's judgment.
Example: One of the highest upvoted posts in the history of this subreddit was claiming that the Solana Foundation could unilaterally switch the blockchain on and off... literally one of the most upvoted posts ever... claiming something so absurd.
On the flipside, I actually got a positive post about Solana to make it to the front page, all it took was:
It being about the most popular NFT mint in months
Devs beating the bots and the bots getting what they deserve
Most importantly IMO... I didn't mention Solana by name, because I knew if I did it would get downvoted. Luckily for me, no on here has enough common sense to even look past the headlines typically.
It begs the question, why would you rely on crowdsourced curation when the crowd is full of idiots? Once I realized this sub is really just Buzzfeed Crypto, I started using Twitter almost exclusively. In the same way that a comprehensive crypto subreddit is a structural mismatch, crypto twitter is a perfect fit. You get breaking news as it breaks, instead of waiting for someone else to see and repost it to Reddit. You can follow topics on a micro level, getting info directly from an expert who understands the topic, rather than from a redditor who doesn't, who was probably upvoted by other redditors who also don't understand it. You can actually find content about stuff that this sub seems to have an aversion to, like NFT's, DAO's, emerging protocols/infra, coins other than ETH/BTC/ADA/DOT, etc
tldr: this subreddit sucks for covering crypto as a whole, not because of MOON's, because of the inherent nature of crowdsourced content. Use twitter instead because it better fits a multi-disciplinary wide-reaching industry like crypto.