this post was submitted on 26 Sep 2025
86 points (95.7% liked)

Uplifting News

16732 readers
293 users here now

Welcome to /c/UpliftingNews (rules), a dedicated space where optimism and positivity converge to bring you the most heartening and inspiring stories from around the world. We strive to curate and share content that lights up your day, invigorates your spirit, and inspires you to spread positivity in your own way. This is a sanctuary for those seeking a break from the incessant negativity and rage (e.g. schadenfreude) often found in today's news cycle. From acts of everyday kindness to large-scale philanthropic efforts, from individual achievements to community triumphs, we bring you news—in text form or otherwise—that gives hope, fosters empathy, and strengthens the belief in humanity's capacity for good, from a quality outlet that does not publish bad copies of copies of copies.

Here in /c/UpliftingNews, we uphold the values of respect, empathy, and inclusivity, fostering a supportive and vibrant community. We encourage you to share your positive news, comment, engage in uplifting conversations, and find solace in the goodness that exists around us. We are more than a news-sharing platform; we are a community built on the power of positivity and the collective desire for a more hopeful world. Remember, your small acts of kindness can be someone else's big ray of hope. Be part of the positivity revolution; share, uplift, inspire!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Recently, we merry mods have been noticing many-a-comments being in the report queue for perceived negativity (the aim of the community being to provide "a break from the incessant negativity and rage"). What actions should we do about these, if any? Do we need a newsome another-rule for this?

Here's what I think: Some skepticism and scrutiny is always quite needed knowledge—especially against information that's actually untrue/misleading—and any bars I can think of for removing negative comments would apply to reasonable skepticism as well. Thus, the mod team is asking y'all to drop some bars!

Edit

Assorted examples of reported comments

Actually, you’ve missed the mark. It’s not whining about an advancement, it’s legitimate criticism of the US health industry. He’s just saying what we all know to be true which is that regardless of technological improvements, lifesaving care will continue to be ruinously expensive for those that are able to access it and gatekept from many others.

If you have a problem with comments like these undermining celebration of scientific progress, then maybe you should think about the structural political issues that lead people to disillusionment and cynicism rather than labeling people as conspiracy theorists.

You know “big red“ voted for Trump. It’s a cute story, but I hope he gets what he voted for In the end

It’s too bad that curing patients is not a sustainable business model. Even if this did work we would only ever see it developed if you had to take it twice a month for the rest of your life in order to survive.

Edit: sorry, I just noticed this is in Uplifting News. So, let’s be optimistic. Maybe global capitalism will collapse and governments will start trying to take care of people.

Nobody said anything about ICE, we’re talking about the military known for bombing weddings in multiple middle eastern countries and then bombing ambulances when they respond.

If you have the money to commit atrocities in a dozen countries at once, you have money to spare.

That’s .world for you; complaining about Reddit while trying to recreate it exactly

It’s very sad to see hype like this. They only had 30 enrolled, this was just a safety study, and while the data looks promising, there is certainly not enough statistical power, which is why there is no approval yet.

Shame on the BBC. If you are going to quote invesigators, you should state that they have paid consultancy deals with UniQure. The same two people were equally excited about a Roche therapy years ago…

But UniCure stock went up 200% today, which is the point.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] sga@piefed.social 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

My 2 cents (not as a mod) - do not remove or ban. My primary reason is that there should be some healthy dose of reality in the mix. for example, there was a post about some miracle drug which cures addiction. it was in comments that clarified that drug has been known for quite some time, and has not been prescribed because it's efficacy is not proven (it is more vibes/feels/placebo based), and it increases risk for heart related diseases (so we can not just prescribe and be like if it does not work, there is no harm).

As a mod, i do feel there is some room to change the rules. we can mostly just ask the comments section to be more civil. it is fair to point problems, but not shit unnecessarily. for example, there was a recent post about some actor "adopting" a town/village. in comments someone said that these never work. if they really want to bring change, they should lobby and bring policy change (which they say so casually as if it is that easy to be done). I did not delete the comment for two reasons - one i believe in free speech, and if what they say is shit, it will get downvoted (while i am not always about mob justice, it is good to know what the people think) (in case of this comment, it was -10 - -15 ish last i checkd). Secondly, i had no rule allowing me to do so - we delete/ban hate speech, an uncivility, but in this case, this anger was not targetted (it was more of - they never end up bringing anything good kinda argument instead of actor specific, it was more about how they go by generally). while it does not match the general vibe of community, i do not feel i should delete stuff hust on that basis.

the comment i was talking about - https://piefed.social/post/1306755#comment_8157021

[–] Aatube@kbin.melroy.org 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

just so you know, ibogaine is not a placebo, has standout efficacy, but also standout elevated heart risks etc as well as being drugs-ish itself. it's also poorly understood

[–] sga@piefed.social 1 points 2 days ago

I am sorry, i should have not made comment before knowing fully. i did not really mean placebo part, but i rember reading the wiki page and it said mixed results. I am not saying it does nothing, but it seemingly is not a miracle drug. thanks for correcting