• Jimmycrackcrack
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    9 months ago

    It’s rarely if ever a bad thing to provide additional detail and improve understanding of a headline. The commenter didn’t defend Huffman’s compensation, even going so far as to lament it will appear that they are an apologist for the CEO. They also didn’t address their comment to moderators which is important as the title of this Lemmy post implies both that the comment was addressed to unpaid moderators of Reddit and also by doing so, that it was condescendingly justifying to them why their work should go unpaid while the CEO of Reddit is paid handsomely.

    The fact that the compensation package isn’t literally $193M cash isn’t saying the situation is just fine and dandy and neither is pointing that fact out. Headlines can reduce information to levels that reach meaninglessness, especially when they do so on purpose to be incendiary. If this commenter adds correct details to the situation, deciding if those details changes its moral complexion is up to the readers of the comment, personally I don’t think they do. I don’t see however, why there needs to be a separate discussion on lemmy not about the actual issue that pissed everyone off, but instead shitting on some random commenter who added relevant detail to the original issue that was actually worthy of discussion in the first place.

    • sushibowl@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      Some mighty editorialising in the title of this post here, and it seems a bunch of people are happy to comment without reading the post at all.

      People just love shitting on Reddit but in terms of post and comment quality, Lemmy is exactly the same.