Dog-piling is when someone expresses an opinion and people swarm in the comments telling the OC how wrong they are and how right they are. Typically the person getting dogpiled is downvoted into oblivion in the process. Note that I'm not talking about anything controversial in their opinion or the comment being trolling in any way; just any general disagreement with the groupthink.
Brief example:
User 1: There are lots of factors at play here, not just money. There's X, Y, Z, and those are all independent from money.
|____> User 2: No, it's money. It's always money
|______> User 4: Right? How can anyone think it's anything *but* money? Some people!
|____> User 3: Yes, well, X, Y, and Z wouldn't be a problem if not for capitalism, so it's definitely money, and you're wrong.
|____> User 5: It all boils down to money; always does.
|____> User 6: Of course it's money. Only a capitalist bootlicker would think otherwise.
|____> User 7: Go back to Reddit, troll.
|____> User 8: You're so close, but it's money.
...
|____> User 999: (Same as the last 998 comments; contributes nothing except attacking the opinion for being different)
None of that adds anything to the discussion; they're not engaging on the subject, just attacking the opinion because it differs.
That behavior does not seem healthy to me and seems like it's almost designed to discourage anyone from expressing any opinion that's not part of the established group think. Again, I am not talking about trolls here, just any kind of differing opinions.
Should that kind of behavior be discouraged? If so, as a mod, what would be the best way to address it? After the 2nd or 3rd dogpile comment, start removing subsequent ones that are just piling on?
It's definitely a people problem, so I'm curious what would be a gentle but firm way to deal with it.
Yeah....that's why I'm throwing the question out there.
I would envision this falling under the "civility" rules in most places, but it would also be worthy of a dedicated rule. And yeah, reducing the potential for abuse is something to consider.
Basically, I see this happening a lot and am starting to feel like it's creating a hostile environment that will never attract any new users (i.e. it's bad for the Fediverse as a whole). I feel like this kind of behavior is just outside of the "respectful disagreement" that's expected in most places, but I'm unsure what the best way to deal with it is (or if it even should be something to deal with).
I've noticed the start of the dog pile is typically not the issue. Often it starts by accident; like two users coincidentally replying the same thing to a third one, seconds apart, because they didn't see each other's reply. I feel like most people would immediately see it and say "nah, coincidence".
The issue is how it keeps going on and on and on. So perhaps this could be addressed by avoiding the pile to grow, instead of just avoiding it from beginning? Basically, different rules for early and late replies.
I'm just throwing ideas in, mind you.
Yeah, that's kind of what I was thinking. After the 3rd or 4th near-identical "you're wrong, but I'm providing no new information on the subject" reply, maybe start removing them. The point is to avoid a dogpile/echo chamber forming, so nuking it from the first comment definitely wouldn't be the way to go (or even really fair).