Forums / Discussion / Serious Debate

I'm probably gonna get some flak for this, but I feel that I must ask this question. I want to know what are your opinion on circlejerks and if there is anything to do to prevent more cases of it happening on this site.

Why prevent them? :3

Here's some basic ideas I was told for team building, but it can be applied here.

1. Have civil dicussions, don't be a child name-calling or spouting nonsense.
2. Stop polarization, don't deal in absolutes. Chances are the someone with a similar belief to the next person isn't going to be the same.
3. Be kind, kind of a given.
4. Don't immediately shoot someone's idea/question down, explain to them in a calm fashion why you think the way you think.

This may be very biased but prevent pictures like these:



These provide nothing to the discussion other than "We're so great guys aren't we yeah we fucking are!"
We shouldn't upload these kinds of picture because the sole purpose is making the side in question fell better than the other side and the comments just a greeing with that while making the other side feel like shit.
(And no this isn't about gamergate, please stay on topic)

I think it's most easily prevented by making sure you're not doing anything to keep or shame someone from giving their opinion. I'm guilty of that, but I don't do it intentionally.

In the instances where someone is spouting the same nonsense repeatedly, I think you leave that to the mods. They're pretty active and level-headed here.

I don't think there is a way to prevent them. Ways to stop them from becoming as deep as they could or as many in number but there will always be circle jerks I finks. People nearly always find ways to put others below them, or put themselves above over others based just on opinions.

There aren't positive circlejerks here. The only ones I ever see are people bandwagoning against someone or something, which I suppose can only be fixed by people not having mob mentality at all times.

I'm not a fan. I like hearing opinions different from mine just as much as opinions that are the same as mine, especially if the conversation is civil and friendly. Circlejerking opinions and places tend to keep you from thinking outside the box and trying out new perspectives.

How to prevent it? Well, try not shooting down people with varying opinions. Obviously be respectful. The comment section of KYM tends to lack this (like any comment section really.) Unless KYM gets a decent comment moderator system, I doubt that portion of the site will be saved. The forums are okay.

Circlejerking on a meme documenting website is akin to shitting on your own doorstep. It's almost a redundant practice. A fine example is the incredibly short lifespan of "injokes" that have come to life in the forums, combine this with the karma system and you have the perfect mixture for a never ending circlejerk.

You'll never be able to prevent it because the socially insecure (it takes a glance of the forums to see this) young teen userbase find comfort in getting an upvote from their equally as handicapped peers as they lurk around in he playpen called Riff Raff.

To tell you the truth, the term "circlejerk" in and and of itself I find kinda insincere and bullshit. The way I see it normally used, it seems like the meaning actually being conveyed is "when people talk about something they agree with and I don't agree/like those people". The reason for that is while it's also supposed to include the systematic rejection of any and all opinions that don't meet the very rigid accepted "standard", people who accuse a group of being a circlejerk they very rarely attempt to provide concrete evidence for that going on beyond maybe one or two examples, which are often questionable at best. Remember, downvote-bombed comments/posts containing opposing viewpoint isn't necessarily make for solid proof unless those comments and posts were at least somewhat civil in the first place and not intended to incite a negative reaction.

I basically agree with most of what Laika has said in his post. Could have not said it better myself, but i might as well give it a shot on how I really feel about the current state of kym.

The amount of circle jerking on this site is at an all time high and I just cant stand by and say nothing about it anymore. One of the biggest examples on this site is the entire don joke and the people who keep spamming that shit on every entry made by don as a way to get cheap laughs and karma points. It just goes to show how badly the community has degenerated to the point of the joke being the same as shitposting in the comment section. The people that keep spamming those same jokes and images on every fucking comment section need to stop and actually contribute something constructive or actually something that is relevant to the entry or crawl back to the cesspool of cancer that is Riff raff.

Also riff raff is another example of circlejerking and also creates more circlejerkers. It just rewards people for being stupid and annoying by making pointless threads. Seriously, nobody gives a shit about irc threads other than irc people. I don't want to see cringe worthy r34 art of kym moderators or peoples shitty attempts to cosplay as mods. JFF has much better content and does not promote garbage like a vast majority of riff raff threads.

I really do not give a shit if my opinion on the situation of circlejerking bothers people. I just cannot fucking take anymore how low the community has sunk to.

I could just say fuck it all and just deactivate, but I would much rather stick around and at least try and do something to try and make the community somewhat more tolerable than what it is currently at now than leave it to drown in its own shit and filth.

If you have any objections to anything I say, feel free to fire away.

Isn't this discussion a circlejerk?

It really depends on how you define "circlejerking".
If users are circlejerking themselves by hating on a user or a group of users then they need to be stopped. I know this isn't very uncommon on KYM (I myself am guilty of having done this before; only later realizing how much of a twat I was being), so I think that the best solution to this would be to remind these users of the "Be Friendly" rule, and take more serious action only if they continue being hateful after their warning.
However, if users are just glorifying / supporting themselves, as long as no derogating or hate is involved, then I don't consider it to be a problem. Vanity really isn't a problem aside from being slightly annoying. If you disagree with an egotistical group's opinions, it's best to just avoid them.

I feel like a circlejerk is when you purposely surround yourself with people who have the exact same views and opinions as you in order to make yourself feel better about feeling that particular way, "being more right", and to avoid having to hear any opposing viewpoints.

At least that's how I see it.

How would you prevent it? I'd say the only real way is to either remain neutral to issues, or have an open mind to opposing arguments.

Get rid of downvoting and burring comments.

Reddit is possibly the worst community for circlejerking due to their voting system.

When someone has a different opinion, do no just downvote and ignore, actually engage in conversation with them.

There's no point in getting rid of downvoting unless we are getting rid of the entire karma system (which wouldn't be the worst thing in the world if you ask me). Youtube got rid of downvoting and it only made the comments system worse rather than better. Getting told by 20 different people my opinion sucks without giving any substantial counter-argument is way more annoying than getting buried by downvotes

I honestly do not think karma is the cause for circlejerking. And I don't think circlejerking is a problem anyway, except for situations like Muffinlicious described where everyone gangs up on a user. Mob mentality is just a part of human nature.

Hmmmm….

I don't really think it's possible to avoid circlejerks. Pretty much everyone has the innate desire to get their egos stroked and to get approval from others…. So of course, there's gonna be circlejerks and there's gonna be people making in jokes and comments for upvotes… But it doesn't really bother me. Either I've never really seen one or it all just flies over my head and I don't notice. Plus I hold Muffinlicious' opinion…. As long as you aren't putting other people and are just having a an ego stroking party… It's not THAT bad.

But I do think a circle jerker can stop themselves if they realize what they are doing and are willing to not succumb to the desire to keep getting their egos stroked….

I don't completely agree with Laika's/Asura's opinions about Riff Raff and injokes either…. And I don't count those as circlejerks because to me circlejerks have to be pointless discussions to inflate the participants' egos and just making an injoke to get upvotes doesn't really qualify as that to me.

I like injokes and IRC jokes. I feel like its all apart of what makes KYM unique…. As long as it doesn't blow up/get out of hand like the time where 1/3 of Riff Raff thread's were about Mare…
But…. I still agree about somethings when it comes to Riff Raff. The thread qaulity ranges from good (on rare occasions) to bearable (most of the time), to bad threads that are made even worse because all people do in response is bitch about it's qaulity. Plus people are constantly trying to outdo each other and things by rehashing succesful threads, making parody threads when a parody thread already exists…. Stuff like that.

I'm with Muffins, I really think we should first decide what defines a circlejerk in this thread.

Reading through this thread, it sounds like we have several different idea's of what constitutes a circlejerk

MY understanding of a circlejerk is this: when a group of guys all echo the same agreement among each other…regardless of how factual it is…and constantly affirm each other on this agreement. While at the same time, shutting out any dissent to that agreement.

Good example: when the KYM was at its most anti-feminist state (like, last year when the SJW term started going viral) everyone constantly affirmed each other that feminists were the devil and simply downvoted any disagreement into non-existence.

But here we got people here calling the Don worship a circlejerk….is it really? I thought that was just a popular joke, not an echo-chamber that Don really is the god of maymays…not a serious one anyway.

Circlejerking is not to be confused with literally jerking another guy off.

On the other hand, if we have all these dissenting opinions on circlejerks, I guess that means this thread is protected from becoming a giant circlejerk against circlejerks

When it comes to it I put circlejerks in the same boat as injokes, they are memetic and driven by a mob of the same users.

>"is don worship a circlejerk?"
Yes, in my opinion it is. The only way people seem to be separating circlejerk from injokes is that one is a group of users sharing the same mundane opinion and the other is a group sharing the same dead joke.

The problem is pretty simple when you look at it, these two things are memetic in their design on a site dedicated to memes filled by users who blatantly enjoy memes. It should come as no surprise to find them being spread about the forums like a wild woman's shit. The karma system is just a catalyst that does nothing but make things multiple times worse, for people who bathe in the injokes/circlejerks it serves only as a guide on the current forum likes and dislikes and how they should conform to it. Like I said before the nature of the users themselves doesnt help either.

I don't believe that completely getting rid of the karma system is a good idea, it serves as a good guide when looking at someone's profile. But I do think that the counter next to each post should be gotten rid of so that upvotes and downvotes are anonymous to users

To me, what defines a circlejerk is unoriginal content pertaining to the mass opinion being submitted and upvoted as opposed to original, opposing content. Like on GTA modsites, i consider sports/super car packs circlejerks because they are just the same rehashed thing, and get good ratings due to the sports car worship, while a pack of SUV's would do poorley because it opposes the mass opinion.

"Getting told by 20 different people my opinion sucks without giving any substantial counter-argument is way more annoying than getting buried by downvotes"

but it gets rid of circlejerking, which is what this topic is about.

If you have multiple ideas receiving the same amount of attention, then there is no circlejerking.

It doesn't get rid of circlejerking though. My point was getting rid of downvotes won't encourage good discussion. The people that leave a downvote and walk away are pretty likely to be people that will just shut down any dissenting opinion without actually leaving it open for real discussion. That's not a cure for circlejerking if you ask me. If I leave a comment on a thread that's opposing what the others in the thread are saying and there's no option to downvote I may get one or two responses with legitimate counter arguments and then a dozen others that just say things like "You're and idiot" or "Go kill yourself" or "Get out of here, feminazi/neckbeard/weaboo/etc.". That's not multiple ideas receiving the same amount of attention, that's discouraging others with differing opinions from joining the conversation.

the problem with downvoting is that is buries unpopular opinion.
I'd completely agree with you if downvoting didn't bury comments.

burying comments basicly removes them from the conversation (especially in places like reddit where you have to really dig to find unpopular opinion, less here since you just have to click a button to see the comment), which leaves just the most popular opinion, which leads to circlejerking.

So i guess its not downvoting i dislike, but the censorship that downvoted comments receive.

Some comments are extremely off topic and should be buried or removed, but many times its simply unpopular opinions that it happens to.

I'm late, but some things I think are important that I don't believe has been said here yet: always try to think critically about what the group is saying, even if you're inclined to support that "side". If you don't agree with something about it, don't be afraid to say so. If someone else is going against the grain and expressing a differing opinion (especially if it's in a civil way), give them your support, and if you agree with them, say so. Comment voting is nothing compared to positive comments, and you'd be amazed how just having one or two people appreciate what you're saying can counterbalance a whole slew of unpleasantness.

If you ask me the number one sign that a internet community is a circle jerk is when the staff will either ban you are temporary ban you for disagreeing with the status quo or with the userbase.

You can't really prevent a circlejerk because if a site will ban you for disagreeing then it's already too late. Reddit is a definitive example of this because they shadowban a ton of people for disagreeing with the staff or things they don't like.

"Group polarization- if a group is like-minded, discussion strengthens its prevailing opinions… It occurs when people within a group discuss an idea that most of them either favor or oppose… Beneficial results can be seen when it reinforces the resolve of those in a self-help group or amplifies tolerance in a low-prejudice group… Dire consequences can be seen when high-prejudice subjects discuss racial issues and become more prejudiced."

Play devils advocate from time to time.

Even if you don't believe in the opinion you are expressing its better to have an actual discussion about a topic then a vaccum of similar mindedness. When the latter occurs nothing is gained, the same viewpoints and information are just parroted back and forth endlessly like a broken record.

The absolute best cure for circlejerking is to keep your discussions moving and talking to all sorts of people. It's best to avoid debating seriously with people who just simply share your beliefs because at that point you're simply preaching to the choir.

Devil's advocate is also a great tool to keep yourself from getting too radicalized in your opinions. It helps you patch holes in your argument.

Also, it's important to remain humble – you don't know everything and you don't represent every experience in the world. Hypocrisy does serve a purpose, it serves the purpose of being highlights to flaws in your philosophy. Don't hide from people calling this behaviour out, instead, embrace it; it will help keep you away from serious circlejerking.

(I know I'm late, but I think this topic has become relevant this week, now that we got some religion-related memes coming up)

In order to control circlejerks, we should first have a proper definition, or at least know how to detect them.

Here's my example. It's a little cluttered, but I hope you can understand it:

User Alice and user Bob start debating over if tomatoes are fruits or vegetables on a forum about cooking; Random users Claire and David support Bob's argument and help him, and Alice starts getting too much shit on her face. After some twenty minutes, she realises that the other users won't change their opinion and logs out.

Some hours later, random user Eddy sees the discussion; by this point, random users Fiona, Gerry and Hilda have joined the "debate", and all of them support Bob. Seeing that Alice hasn't logged in, they spend the entire talking about how those who side with Alice are wrong and that they're the 'only truth'. Eddy, who sides with Alice, tries to defend her opinion, but the other users quickly start bashing him as well, and once Eddy is also shunned, the remaining users continue stroking each other's genitals, waiting for someone else to come. This, is what I call a circlejerk.

There can be several variants: in this example, Alice and Bob both have very good arguments; Claire and David don't have very strong ones, but they can back what Bob says; Fiona, Gerry and Hilda have awful arguments, but since they support Bob, they won't be criticized. Eddy's argument's quality won't matter; since he came late to the party, he's going to get bashed no matter what, prompting him to say "screw you guys, I'm logging out" too. In other cases, everyone on both sides can have very shitty arguments (and this is pretty common, sadly).

And of course, there are also the better known and easier to explain examples where Alice creates the topic just to talk about how much she loves saying that tomatoes are vegetables, and all users from Bob to Yvonne agree with her, and when Zack comes to say he thinks they're fruits, everyone will quickly reject him. In these cases where there are more users, hypocrisy and ignorance are the Vaseline that the users use to lubricate each other's cocks as they stroke them, and many times they'll randomly bash those in the opposite side without a real reason.

I know this example is a little more extreme, but it can usually be found on forum boards that deal with an specific, very debatable topic.

I should clarify, however, that I think only these debatable topics can turn into circlejerks. Of course, you expect people on a Pokémon forum to say (mostly) good things about Pokémon as a franchise. However, when you make a thread about something very subjective about Pokémon that even the biggest fans are divided about, if one side of the factions manages to "take control" of the topic, and (this is very important), their arguments' quality turns into shit, then it becomes a circlejerk.

Sadly, the only way to fully prevent circlejerking is to abstain from creating a topic that can attract these debates, but I know this is impossible. An up/downvoting system is not always helpful either.

However, if both sides are equal in arguments amount and quality for long enough, a circlejerk won't be formed. Nevertheless, this is the internet, and anyone in either side can make a fatal mistake that could lead the topic to become a circlejerk. And if a circlejerk is never formed, there's still a chance for the discussion to become really cringeworthy as it goes.