Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Reddit and the Struggle to Detoxify the Internet

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 757 posts

Re: Reddit and the Struggle to Detoxify the Internet

#131

Post by crankylinuxuser »

jstanley wrote: post #66
ASalazarMX wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reddit has a large user base and a myriad of subreddits where different solutions have been tried. So far, the best I've seen is strong moderation: clear rules and swift enforcement. AskScience is a shining example of a high quality subreddit, although the comment section usually looks like a graveyard with 90% of the comments removed.

I'd like to see moderation decoupled from the forum namespace. So you'd subscribe to a forum namespace in order to see posts about a topic (say, AskScience), but you would then also subscribe to whichever moderators you want. The moderation wouldn't be inextricably tied to the namespace. Anybody can post anything in any namespace (and anybody can declare themselves a moderator of any namespace), but people will only…

Yep. That was usenet. But in those days, we didn't have 3rd party recommended filters - but there's no reason why they wouldn't work now.

Maybe it's time to remake Usenet, minus binaries. Binaries, piracy, and their data load per server are what killed Usenet.

(Yes, I know it's still living on in paid-service world. But gone are the days your ISP runs a machine.)

Re: Reddit and the Struggle to Detoxify the Internet

#132

Post by sincerely »

UrukParthian wrote: post #119

Toxic statements = statements from a different political orientation Why are people so willing to embrace Orwellian doublethink? My prediction is that such a sword will do decapitate undeserving people of all political aisles.

The article is largely about removing flagrantly racist content (the subreddits they listed as examples were like r/KKK and r/CoonTown) and various illegal content like bestiality videos. It seems disingenuous to classify these as simply "different political orientation".

Re: Reddit and the Struggle to Detoxify the Internet

#133

Post by apeace »

A lot of commenters here are mentioning that better education could help solve this problem. I agree.

What if there were a new type of "teacher" who replaced or augmented regular mods on sites like Reddit?

Universities strive to hire professors who will teach students to be open-minded, consider the sources of information, and just think better in general. The prestige of each university is largely based on this factor. We tend to measure this by looking at the research accomplishments of the professors, or by looking at how many great thinkers/leaders come out of those universities.

What if sites like Reddit did the same thing, and tried to build their prestige based on excellent moderation? Could they be measured by how many great ideas/movements come out of the platform?

How do universities prevent the "echo chamber" effect where a few mods or a few users can take the whole conversation in one direction?

Re: Reddit and the Struggle to Detoxify the Internet

#134

Post by shaki-dora »

TAForObvReasons wrote: post #79
joshuata wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish this were true, but the amount of fake news spread by trusted news networks, such as newspapers spreading Russian propaganda bots, implies that education isn't sufficient. If a professional cannot discriminate between truth and lies on twitter how can an average person?

The economic incentives are misaligned. Fake news helps with page views and other KPI. If there was an actual enforcable cost associated with misrepresenting the truth, we'd see a slowdown in fake news. The restoration of the Fairness Doctrine would also help stymie some of the biggest promulgators like Fox News * * you can search for "fox news viewers misinformed" and encounter studies and results like http://public…

The analogy of food nicely shows that some sort of race-to-the-bottom does not necessarily occur: there’s still organic or other high quality fresh food even though McDonald’s has been around for a while.

Similarily, there are still excellent news sources. The Economist is often cited in these discussions, and the New York Times is also vigilant in their reporting and the correction of errors when they occur[0].

What we’ve seen is a breakdown in trust of institutions, largely disconnected from actual mistakes on their part. People will quickly demand proof and invoke conspiracy theories when, for example, the there-letter agencies accuse Eussia of interfering in elections. They have learned to invoke “appeal to authority fallacy”too well, without offering an alternative. Because you cannot evaluate a new story without in some way deferring to the reputation of the publisher.

Re: Reddit and the Struggle to Detoxify the Internet

#135

Post by maxerickson »

kazanz wrote: post #95

I'd argue that a cross-internet reputation service would fix this problem. 1. The reputation system is affected by voting on all sites in which you participate. 2. The history of your participation across sites is viewable in your history (ala reddit, HN) 3. Your reputation is displayed with you participation wherever you participate. Sites could then put reputation limits only allowing users above a certain reputati…

That will only work if you insist on tying the reputation to identities.

Even then it probably won't stop people being awful (there's plenty of awful stuff posted by identifiable people). But if people can be pseudonymous, it won't work at all.

Re: Reddit and the Struggle to Detoxify the Internet

#137

Post by gricardo99 »

cavisne wrote: post #104
_m8fo wrote: post #46

So we've tried: - Real identities (Facebook comments) - Voting and self moderation (Reddit, HN, etc.) - Strong moderation (Reddit, HN) They all result in toxic comments, trolling, an echo chamber,or worse, a complete lack of participation. There's no real solution to this problem. However, if you create consequences or a cost to commenting you'd eliminate toxic comments and trolling at the cost of less participation…

I think nextdoor does this model and it’s still notorious for trolling/internet fights.

I’m amazed at how much trolling there is on Nextdoor. It’s not hate speech level, and most posts seem pretty cordial but considering the community venue aspect I’m just floored at how reflexively shitty people can be the minute there’s a divergence of opinions.

Re: Reddit and the Struggle to Detoxify the Internet

#138

Post by overthemoon »

ralusek wrote: post #74
wnevets wrote: post #47

Reddit has zero problem leaving post that threaten the lives of an entire religious group on their frontpage. If they were serious certain subs would be nuked.

You realize that is a perfectly reasonable objective for a site to be a mostly impartial, user-moderated forum, right? I don't consider any view I encounter on reddit to be endorsed by the platform. If people want content moderated with a specific slant, just subscribe to the subreddits that suit your tolerance, there are plenty that are heavily moderated. Personally, I love seeing things that I disagree with on redd…

The parent commenter specifically said "post[s] that threaten the lives of an entire religious group". Hardly comparable to something someone can simply disagree with.

Re: Reddit and the Struggle to Detoxify the Internet

#139

Post by VLM »

_m8fo wrote: post #46

So we've tried: - Real identities (Facebook comments) - Voting and self moderation (Reddit, HN, etc.) - Strong moderation (Reddit, HN) They all result in toxic comments, trolling, an echo chamber,or worse, a complete lack of participation. There's no real solution to this problem. However, if you create consequences or a cost to commenting you'd eliminate toxic comments and trolling at the cost of less participation…

Your list consists entirely of push media. Some example of pull media that "play well with others" or at least are not actively anti-social are podcasts and email listservs. Of course its easier for advertisers to monetize push media.

In the long run push media is always going to be troll-ier and offend more people than pull media.

Re: Reddit and the Struggle to Detoxify the Internet

#140

Post by rexpop »

_m8fo wrote: post #46

So we've tried: - Real identities (Facebook comments) - Voting and self moderation (Reddit, HN, etc.) - Strong moderation (Reddit, HN) They all result in toxic comments, trolling, an echo chamber,or worse, a complete lack of participation. There's no real solution to this problem. However, if you create consequences or a cost to commenting you'd eliminate toxic comments and trolling at the cost of less participation…

I think you're underestimating the cost to society of your parenthetical. To the degree that "the personal is political", sharing the details of one's circumstances — especially as a marginalized or disenfranchised individual — can reveal ostensibly unique struggles to be widespread societal problems. Twitter does this, and has been good for highlighting shared experiences. We'll lose a platform for that very important, seemingly trivial disclosure if we improperly disincentivize contributions. We need to keep "poor participants" in the common conversation.

Secondly, I notice no mention of deliberate, paid propagandizing, i.e. professionally divisive sock-puppets employed by sock-puppet firms.

Any serious discussion of threats to a healthy public discourse must address deliberate attempts to undermine the legitimacy of the common voice.

Post reply on HN