Hegemony, perhaps.

I think you messed that sentence up, but I get what you're trying to say....

And I think it's this. The opinions you get from people 'IRL' are not apt to be as strong as the ones online, and or will run into the regency bias.

For example, it's very unlikely you'll actually meet someone that has used 10 different coffee makers because they wanted to see which one was best. Online on some subreddit, you're very likely to meet someone who has done exactly that. Of course those people with strong opinions are the ones that are apt to post most online.

So who's option is wrong? Neither. That's why they are opinions.

No, I've noticed what he's talking about, and it's not the strength of the opinion, it's what the opinion is. Reddit has a moral system that's completely misaligned with real world morality, where having a child or being autistic makes you a bad person, even if you didn't do anything wrong. You can find some really weird takes on r/AITA, which ironically points out that the subreddit has a fucked up sense of morality in its highest rated post.

Not sure if you've noticed but younger generations that go out and do things are big into having children. Now, some groups on reddit are more extreme on that, but the general trend of Americans at least is to tell the act of having kids to screw off.

---

But to answer your question, it's not Reddit that has this moral system, it's social media in general that has a moral system that does not match reality (kinda). The loudest idiots tend to get voted up, moderates disappear in the bulk of posts. Binary voting systems on sites tend to amplify this. Content suggestion systems tend to lift up contentious posts for engagement. Welcome to the internet.

But coming back to (kinda). This is becoming reality. Behavior IRL affects behavior online. Online behavior affects IRL behavior. People don't talk to their neighbors these days in most places. Communities are spread all over the earth.