Just because you can also use the site instead of a google image search doesn't nullify that, and it doesn't make the site good

If reddit sucks for discussion then it suck for discussion, but it is great if you are looking for a fresh constant, quality user shared streams of corgis that is organized by consensus of the community. Yeah, the upvote/downvote system is a key aspect of the site, it has its positives, it has negatives, but just because a subset of reddits content suffers for it does mean the entire system is terrible for all content, & can't benefit from the system.

Just because YouTube has put a system in place that enables Jake Pual to share his opinions, his content, & make money of it. Doesn't that negate the positives it has when say, a little journalist to share his opinions, his content, & make money of it.

You're completely missing the point

You can not like /r/TheDonald or whatever

That's not what makes Reddit garbage

What makes Reddit garbage is that it is about communities and communication, and it has built in systems that downplay unpopular ideas and punish users for breaking away from the norm

Much like how YouTube has a shit flagging system that makes continuing a channel often nearly or completely impossible, due to often arbitrary pruning of monetization

And video access

That doesn't become moot because you like to watch cat videos

I'll be honest Beeman we have hit an impasse, I feel like I am arguing with someone who sees fire as an inherent evil because it burns down houses, I'll acknowledge that fire has it bad aspects for being used to burn down houses, & there is nothing we can do about it, but fire has properties that is useful like being able to cook food, being able to keep you warm & that is why people see fire as something more positive than a negative for its utilities even when things go wrong a lot with it. But you just go back to say fire is inherent evil because it burns down houses, & that is why fire is simply terrible without regard for the useful good attributes.

No I'm saying when a core feature of a site is bad, and all the other features are performed by other sites, that site is bad

Which also just feels like saying fire is inherent evil because it burns down houses & can be replaced by electric heaters if you want to cook food & warm up, which technically true in certain regards, but disregards why people would still prefer using fire like, not having electricity & it is easy to make with some wood, wanting a certain flavor fire gives their food, the experience of looking at a fire while it is warming you up.

Look, I will give a personal example. I hate twitter, I am never going to make a twitter account because what offers to me is limited compared what I want from other sites, & it has far too many downsides in its for me to have a good experience of heavily using it. But there are people who use twitter in a way that I can still enjoy looking in on parts of it regularly, even if most of twitter does not appeal to me as a whole, I can still see how it can be used well for certain purposes & why people would want to use it.

No your analogy doesn't work here. Fire does not undermine its own purpose

Twitter doesn't either tbh. Users created the blocklists themselves

Wait a second... what do you think reddits purpose is?

Reddit is a communication platform, at the end of the day

It's effectively a collection of user moderated and created forums

&...?

You have left out a massive final component of what reddit is.

you mean WAS

I think they have forgotten the web rating component of the site...

Sorry, could you explain how that contradicts my point?

How does website dedicated to user created, moderated, rated content undermine itself by people voting on the stuff?

Voting is one of the key aspects to the site.

Because the voting hides content, and promotes content only along very narrow lines

Reddit has as many hugboxes as it does by virtue of its design

Is there currently a discussion going on?

Yes

Alrightie, you guys have fun~

Okay, there are subreddits that are hug boxes by a culmination of factors, one of which can be caused by voting. I have seen subreddits that are safe spaces because of the mods they have & the mods are accountable to nobody but the admins. Are there places like some discord servers bad because they have moderation & the mods are jerks? Yes, but that is a product of the people who are mods, not the concept of moderation. I have seen subreddits in civil wars within communities because there are lots of different people with lots of different opinions, with mods who to tolerate both sides & both sides being big enough to have both their views represented in up votes.

That's the thing. It takes no work for a conversation in discord to go smoothly. It is exceptional when reddit isn't a self affirming circlejerk

I'm not even talking about moderation. I'm talking about design and user behavior

And how the two interact

You're the one going off about corgis and mods and shit when none of it changes the fact that the voting system is bad, and has to he overcome for any kind of conversation to be viable

And this is an issue other sites solved *ages* ago, by not having a shitty system implemented on a base level

You are overlooking the most obvious part of voting & that is demographics, the more chilled out communities don't care if you have a contrarian opinion, they will even upvote it if is well stated, there are communities who are interested in welcoming new people to join it rather than just isolating themselves to just the hard core elements.

Even a garbage place like /r/CringeAnarchy, which is a place that that have a bunch of lax mods who do the bare minimum to moderate, a place that should according to what you propose should be a hugbox for "alt-right" opinions, just cant do it. As circle jerky as it can get, it simple cant achieve the peak, new people keep on coming in, disagreeing with content, & getting upvotes. People posting cats instead of cringe, people are confused if they people are up voting stuff to cringe with or cringe at or just question if it is cringe at all & asking question of what the is going on. People keep on calling out satire posts instead of falling in line, people keep on switching to mock right wing cringe & /r/CringeAnarchy itself.

The places that do turn into hug boxes are not the ones that vote in circle cerks that can be hostile to contrary opinions & content, it is the subs who have mods that ban people with contrary opinions & content that turns into safe spaces.

>the foundational feature of the site doesn't matter if users choose to not abuse it
I've already addressed this. A shit law isn't not a shit law if enforcement is poor. If you're going youre going to start talking about post/community quality though, you're not really going to win me over there either

But it does matter that it exists & does get used without sedition, why would you assume that people could only use it to be a jerk?

Yes, a bad rule does matter even while it's not being used

And it's not about intent