Like, the site owners/employees/admins/mods are the only ones who choose what to post(and hopefully not extremely bias and a good spread of topics), but the users can still upvote/downvote the post as well as comment and all that?
I like the aggregation mark down style of these sites, but I am not sure about the curation being purely user based. I am curious if the users having a large majority control of the curation hurts the quality, and I’d like to see comparisons if they exist.
Check out Hacker News. Their mission is to only allow thought provoking posts and to not allow enshitification or dumbing down of their platform.
Users can still post content but it is more highly moderated to maintain quality. The users tend to be techy so user submissions are higher quality than average reddit/lemmy posts.
There is a lemmy community that reposts articles from hacker news but now I just browse it on their website or using the Android app Harmonic which I recommend.
Actually I stumbled onto that one before I posted. I have a new goal in life to get to a level that Hacker News posts are just light reading for me.
For now, most of that is way above my pay grade but I loved the posts I understood ha
There’s a bot that reposts HN content, but I’m not sure if it has its own community. And if it does, I don’t think there’s any restrictions on posting from users.
Edit: There is !hackernews@derp.foo . It doesn’t limit users from posting though, but I don’t see anyone really posting other than the bot anyway.
Yeah, some of them are way too technical for me as well. Only some of the articles end up getting reposted to lemmy though, when I browse directly on hacker news, I tend to find a good mix of articles that are less technical but still interesting.