• snooggums@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    1 day ago

    If later text shows that my initial reading was incorrect due to missing context or because I misread their starting point, yeah. For example, if something starts off sounding positive but context shows it is actually a dogwhistle I had not come across before I will go back and correct my votes. It rarely takes even a minute to fix a dozen or so in a chain.

    It isn’t so much that I think my individual votes matter, but because I don’t like knowing I gave a positive interactions with that thing.

    Same thing if I read something as a negative and find out I was wrong, gonna flip those to upvotes!

    • tisktisk@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      If context is really needed to identify something as a dogwhistle, isn’t it already an ineffective utility? I’m not doubting you at all–I know next to nothing about any honest dogwhistles, but I’m always curious to know how people avoid the feeling that of paranoia in these instances–how can you be positive you aren’t just yielding to a fear of some sort?

      • snooggums@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        1 day ago

        Dogwhistles are for the in group to show solidarity. Those outside not recognizing the dogwhistle or having a hard time proving it is a dogwhistle is the entire purpose.