I thought there was something nefarious to it at first, too. My thought was that it was an attempt to subtly "shadow ban" me by forcing me to stop having a discussion and just making me quit, while plausibly hiding behind a "bug." But it happens when I'm in discussions that aren't remotely political in nature. And I've talked to leftists who describe the same exact phenomenon.
Mind you, I'm not saying that the "Most Relevant" feature is a bug in and of itself. And I'm also fairly confident that is used to lightly censor content the algorithm deems unfit. The bug I'm referring to is specifically a comment that is literally a reply to mine, that mentions me, that I got a notification for, that I came to the thread by clicking the notification for, is considered not relevant. The rest of the conversation will still be visible, including the parent comment. But the most recent comment, the one the notification for, will be missing. Their comment, not mine.
There is not a nefarious reason why Facebook would do it that way that I can think of. And there is plenty of good reason to have that feature working. I would understand hiding my argument with someone else from the rest of the people who might be scrolling through. But hiding just the latest comment (made by the other person, who is usually arguing the liberal side) from me? Any nefarious reason I can come up with for that just doesn't add up.
If they simply didn't want me to respond, as though to make it seem like I didn't have a response and lost, it would make way more sense to simply not send the notification. A "missing notification" bug would be completely acceptable to consumers, and most people would never notice the vast majority of the time, and not think anything of it if they caught it. But giving someone a notification and then not showing them the thing once they clicked on? That's just sheer incompetence.
There is not a nefarious reason why Facebook would do it that way that I can think of. And there is plenty of good reason to have that feature working. I would understand hiding my argument with someone else from the rest of the people who might be scrolling through. But hiding just the latest comment (made by the other person, who is usually arguing the liberal side) from me? Any nefarious reason I can come up with for that just doesn't add up.
There are people who have to get their two cents in, especially if they think somebody else is wrong on the Internet.
So you might give up on replying but others won't. They end up digging through hundreds of comments to find the one to reply to, and now Facebook can use that to boost its "engagement" numbers they share with advertisers.
Again, this is not about the user experience. This is about harvesting as much information as possible and subjecting the masses to operant conditioning in their digital Skinner boxes in order to influence and modify behavior.
You reply nicely to that liberal and agree with their comments and see what happens!
Atlantic article from 2013 that's surprisingly good -
Skinner Marketing: We're the Rats, and Facebook Likes Are the Reward
Our Internet handlers are using operant conditioning to modify our behavior.
I did not think of the angle of boosting "engagement" by forcing people to dig through comments to find the comment they wanted to find. However, based on my own anecdotal, personal experience, I think that has to be outweighed by the number of times a person gets frustrated with the entire site and closes out of it, rather than resuming their endless scrolling.
I truly believe this one can be chalked up to incompetence. As shitty as these people are, I do not believe that any engineer gets a direct memo from a higher up to "boost engagement by hiding the reply after a user clicks a notification for that reply." I have a more realistic view on most conspiracies that they are a lot more casual than that. For example, I believe planned obsolescence in products isn't spoken about, but rather, when an engineer asks a higher up if they should go route a or route b, where route a is more expensive, but route b will cause the device to fail possibly within a year, the higher up makes a decision with the idea of planned obsolescence in his head, but covers it with "we need to save costs."
You specifically mentioned you have difficulties finding the thread to reply when arguing with liberals.
Worsening your experience for going against the narrative is an attenpt to modify your behavior. Keep it up and you'll soon find yourself in "Facebook jail".
Read B.F. Skinner's Schedules of Reinforcement and it will make sense.
You specifically mentioned you have difficulties finding the thread to reply when arguing with liberals. Worsening your experience for going against the narrative is an attenpt to modify your behavior. Keep it up and you'll soon find yourself in "Facebook jail".
No, I understand it. This was actually my original thought when it started happening. I explained this in my first comment.
What made me realize it wasn't this was when 1) I had the same issue when talking about non-political matters in the comments, or even when I was actually arguing for the state-approved narrative in cases where my views happen to align and 2) I have heard the same bug affecting normal NPC liberals who always follow the narrative.
I thought there was something nefarious to it at first, too. My thought was that it was an attempt to subtly "shadow ban" me by forcing me to stop having a discussion and just making me quit, while plausibly hiding behind a "bug." But it happens when I'm in discussions that aren't remotely political in nature. And I've talked to leftists who describe the same exact phenomenon.
Mind you, I'm not saying that the "Most Relevant" feature is a bug in and of itself. And I'm also fairly confident that is used to lightly censor content the algorithm deems unfit. The bug I'm referring to is specifically a comment that is literally a reply to mine, that mentions me, that I got a notification for, that I came to the thread by clicking the notification for, is considered not relevant. The rest of the conversation will still be visible, including the parent comment. But the most recent comment, the one the notification for, will be missing. Their comment, not mine.
There is not a nefarious reason why Facebook would do it that way that I can think of. And there is plenty of good reason to have that feature working. I would understand hiding my argument with someone else from the rest of the people who might be scrolling through. But hiding just the latest comment (made by the other person, who is usually arguing the liberal side) from me? Any nefarious reason I can come up with for that just doesn't add up.
If they simply didn't want me to respond, as though to make it seem like I didn't have a response and lost, it would make way more sense to simply not send the notification. A "missing notification" bug would be completely acceptable to consumers, and most people would never notice the vast majority of the time, and not think anything of it if they caught it. But giving someone a notification and then not showing them the thing once they clicked on? That's just sheer incompetence.
There are people who have to get their two cents in, especially if they think somebody else is wrong on the Internet.
So you might give up on replying but others won't. They end up digging through hundreds of comments to find the one to reply to, and now Facebook can use that to boost its "engagement" numbers they share with advertisers.
Again, this is not about the user experience. This is about harvesting as much information as possible and subjecting the masses to operant conditioning in their digital Skinner boxes in order to influence and modify behavior.
You reply nicely to that liberal and agree with their comments and see what happens!
Atlantic article from 2013 that's surprisingly good -
Skinner Marketing: We're the Rats, and Facebook Likes Are the Reward
Our Internet handlers are using operant conditioning to modify our behavior.
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/06/skinner-marketing-were-the-rats-and-facebook-likes-are-the-reward/276613/
https://archive.ph/MSl7h
I did not think of the angle of boosting "engagement" by forcing people to dig through comments to find the comment they wanted to find. However, based on my own anecdotal, personal experience, I think that has to be outweighed by the number of times a person gets frustrated with the entire site and closes out of it, rather than resuming their endless scrolling.
I truly believe this one can be chalked up to incompetence. As shitty as these people are, I do not believe that any engineer gets a direct memo from a higher up to "boost engagement by hiding the reply after a user clicks a notification for that reply." I have a more realistic view on most conspiracies that they are a lot more casual than that. For example, I believe planned obsolescence in products isn't spoken about, but rather, when an engineer asks a higher up if they should go route a or route b, where route a is more expensive, but route b will cause the device to fail possibly within a year, the higher up makes a decision with the idea of planned obsolescence in his head, but covers it with "we need to save costs."
Maybe you don't get it.
You specifically mentioned you have difficulties finding the thread to reply when arguing with liberals.
Worsening your experience for going against the narrative is an attenpt to modify your behavior. Keep it up and you'll soon find yourself in "Facebook jail".
Read B.F. Skinner's Schedules of Reinforcement and it will make sense.
It's intentional.
No, I understand it. This was actually my original thought when it started happening. I explained this in my first comment.
What made me realize it wasn't this was when 1) I had the same issue when talking about non-political matters in the comments, or even when I was actually arguing for the state-approved narrative in cases where my views happen to align and 2) I have heard the same bug affecting normal NPC liberals who always follow the narrative.