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

511–520 of 757 posts

Re: Reddit and the Struggle to Detoxify the Internet

#511

Post by Karrot_Kream »

ddingus wrote: post #228
oblio wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Reddit used to be a place where you could post links to anything on the internet (kind of like this place) and comment on it (without signing up with your email). There's no money to be made with that. HackerNews is different cause it's just a funnel and an online play ground for folks at YC. The day they decide that the signal to noise ratio has decreased past their threshold, this place will be gone faster than t…

Actually, there was money to be made with that. Reddit generates enough to continue being Reddit through the gold program. What happened was Reddit got sold, and that large amount of money raised expectations about "making money", in particular, equating massive traffic to massive potential dollars. Reddit would have been just fine, and would have seen few real financial issues had it not been burdened with providing…

> Ever notice how alphas looking to start shit have a keen interest in the rules? Of course! They want to know what they can get away with.

The problem is, rules are also a way for someone who was wronged to appeal. While it's a line that troublemakers want to thread to push boundaries, when rules are unwritten, communities often become a reflection of the will of the moderator rather than a community of diverse opinion. Codified rules are one of the steps we have to encourage diversity of thought, but of course there needs to be rule enforcement...

Re: Reddit and the Struggle to Detoxify the Internet

#512

Post by larkeith »

VLM wrote: post #164

For, uh, purely scientific purposes I've noticed the posting volume on pr0n subreddits like /r/gonewild and uh, a few dozen similar subreddits, is perhaps 100 to 1000 times the sheer posting volume of a controversial subreddit like /r/the_donald. The sheer volume of relatively R rated pr0n is perhaps 1000 times the volume of everything else. There seems to be tap dancing around the issue that reddit is a 1960s Playbo…

I think it's disingenuous to try to classify Reddit as only a porn site, or to report on its communities in that context - by nature of its size and nature, individual (or groups of) subreddits are nearly as disparate as two separate websites, and should not be generalized based on Reddit as a whole; while the porn communities of Reddit may be the largest section, that does not exclude functionally distinct bodies such as writing groups, political activists, and racist gatherings from existing, each with their own identities.

While there is doubtless overlap that influences demographics and discussion, that influence does not preclude non-porn subreddits from relevance or discussion.

Re: Reddit and the Struggle to Detoxify the Internet

#513

Post by crpatino »

derefr wrote: post #475
guelo wrote: post #470

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Poisoning a conversation is a thing. And if you've participated in online discussions I don't see how you can honestly say it doesn't exist. You're implying that in every thread where a troll shows up to derail the conversation we all have to stop what we're doing and give thoughtful responses to the troll to show them the error of their ways. But then the only possible conversation is debates with trolls. But that g…

No, the parent was simply saying that “trolling” (or, having a bad opinion) doesn’t imply a character flaw, and that we shouldn’t use language that makes that implication, lest we start to think of people who have bad opinions as irredeemable. People can do wrong without being fundamentally bad, broken people. If we treated, say, driving a car the way people treat Internet discourse, you would be dragged out of your…

You know, nobody has been actually linched for either trolling or reckless driving. Maybe some were killed, if they crossed the wrong kind of victim, but that's the risk you assume when being a jerk.

On the other hand, I would fully support a law that would give a temporary suspension on people's driving licenses if there was a reliable way to tell that they have an habit of cutting other drivers off. And to make it a permanent ban on operating any kind of vehicle if you were a reincident. Again, it would be greatly inconvenient for them, but there must be some point when the rights of the public superseed the rights of individual assholes.

Re: Reddit and the Struggle to Detoxify the Internet

#514

Post by fatbird »

ralusek wrote: post #307
fatbird wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with Reddit is that, while it's not endorsing the content, it is facilitating it. You can let the white supremacists in your neighbourhood use your garage for their weekly meetings and plausibly claim that you're just being neighborly while disagreeing with their purpose. But I'm still going to judge you for helping them out, for making their organizing easier and cheaper, and for smoothing the road for t…

Letting white supremacists use my garage for weekly meetings is not the same as me building an establishment for the explicit purpose of facilitating conversations of all kinds, and then not kicking out a white supremacist minority for using the facility. My concern with censorship is always 2 fold: 1.) You have to always assume the person who is in control of censorship is the person who doesn't agree with you. Dona…

Building an establishment to facilitate conversations of all kinds generally does not obligate you to allow every specific conversation. Were it my establishment, I wouldn't permit members of NAMBLA to organize their sex-trafficking trips to Southeast Asia, or white supremacists to organize the next Unite The Right rally. I wouldn't feel at all like I'd betrayed my purpose in facilitating more, and more different, conversations by specifically banning some that are obviously problematic in and of themselves.

I also wouldn't feel like I was censoring anyone. My not facilitating their conversation is not the same as my preventing them from having it. I would also be mindful that the presence of nazis and pedophiles in my establishment was itself a barrier to other communities taking advantage of my facilities; if members of those other communities started showing up after I banned them, I'd probably consider it a net win for freedom of expression and conversational facilitation.

Also, you're soft-pedaling Ben Shapiro by calling him a "conservative pundit", as if he's in the same inoffensive league as Ross Douthat or David Brooks. He was an editor of Breitbart News, which is now quite openly the voice of the "alt-right"; he departed and got on their enemies list because he was smart enough to realize that Trump was going to damage the cause for a generation--which is why they're going after him, because they were quite happy to have an orthodox jew on staff while he was agreeing with them. He's said a variety of things about Arabs and black people that are flat out racist. He's not quite the bomb-thrower that Milo is, but he still drops nuggets such as "Arabs like to bomb crap and live in sewage". Calling him a white supremacist might be hyperbole, but it's not simply conflating conservative views with nazis. He's a racist asshole who advocates for ethnic cleansing. Maybe white supremacy isn't his conscious goal, but when he facilitates that end, it becomes a bit irrelevant if he's actually written that down on his "A better 2018" list.

Re: Reddit and the Struggle to Detoxify the Internet

#515

Post by crpatino »

toomanybeersies wrote: post #484
floren wrote: post #339

I can't wait for the word "toxic" to drop out of favor. It implies that the person is not just giving a bad opinion, but is in fact fundamentally flawed and dangerous. Arsenic isn't toxic because it had a bad day at work, arsenic is by its nature a deadly poison and you can't change it, only avoid it. The vast majority of people labeled "toxic", though, are just humans with a variety of opinions and beliefs, some you…

On that allegory though, the poison is in the dose. Small amounts of copper are required in your diet to keep your body functioning. However, large doses of copper are toxic. Same goes for most drugs.

Likewise, small amounts of trolling are benefical to online debate?

Unless you imply this would be a reminder to everyone what happens when moderators get overly permisive, I do not see how that would be the case

Re: Reddit and the Struggle to Detoxify the Internet

#516

Post by mistermann »

jessaustin wrote: post #506
mistermann wrote: post #482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think we've reached the absolute apex of having a well-informed citizenry? If not, if critical thinking doesn't work, what could we do to improve this situation?

Judging solely on the number of HN commentators who are absolutely incapable of detecting irony or satire, and indeed who may feel those are entirely out of place on HN, the average citizen isn't capable of considering two mutually contradictory propositions at the same time, let alone becoming "well-informed". The various exhortations in this thread to "just teach them!" bespeak a similar innocence. We have a rather…

Critical thinking, specifically, is taught on a widespread basis?

What country are you writing from, and could you give some specific examples?

Re: Reddit and the Struggle to Detoxify the Internet

#517

Post by ddingus »

Karrot_Kream wrote: post #511
ddingus wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, there was money to be made with that. Reddit generates enough to continue being Reddit through the gold program. What happened was Reddit got sold, and that large amount of money raised expectations about "making money", in particular, equating massive traffic to massive potential dollars. Reddit would have been just fine, and would have seen few real financial issues had it not been burdened with providing…

> Ever notice how alphas looking to start shit have a keen interest in the rules? Of course! They want to know what they can get away with. The problem is, rules are also a way for someone who was wronged to appeal. While it's a line that troublemakers want to thread to push boundaries, when rules are unwritten, communities often become a reflection of the will of the moderator rather than a community of diverse opin…

It's entirely possible to appeal sans a set of rules.

The appeals are rooted in norms, and the process is a dialog, kept recoverable, not a trial.

Explain to me how a set of rules isn't a formalized expression if the will of those who created them?

There is more to all of that, in particular, security and agency.

But, those details aside, norms operate much like rules, and are far more resonant, and community owned than rules alone are.

Finally, the organic and well distributed nature of norms tends to check varied and manipulative enforcement of rules. A primary example might be a flare up, vs nefarious intent to make noise and or cause grief.

Think family vs Roberts rules of order.

Re: Reddit and the Struggle to Detoxify the Internet

#518

Post by mistermann »

icanhackit wrote: post #509
mistermann wrote: post #481

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm not sure what discussing a lack of clothing or dressing provocatively would achieve - it's never an adequate defence for poor behaviour or assault by a third party. It might open people's eyes to some of the hypocrisy in the current public dialogue, just one of many issues being that the same action (wearing revealing clothing) is considered just fine and don't you dare even question it you victim-blamer when c…

> It might open people's eyes to some of the hypocrisy in the current public dialogue, just one of many issues being that the same action (wearing revealing clothing) is considered just fine and don't you dare even question it you victim-blamer when committed by one gender, and sexual assault when committed by another. Oh and by the way, "all we want is to be treated equally'. I'm not seeing apples for apples in your…

> I'm not seeing apples for apples in your argument - it'd be valid to say the popular female opinion (whatever that is) is hypocritical if their stance was that men couldn't wear revealing clothing

Isn't that their stance? If a man went out in public with 1/3 of the flesh of his penis showing, everyone would be cool with it? The reality is, he'd be arrested for indecent exposure. In this case, the equivalent of what women do on a regular basis is quite literally illegal.

> but you're making the point that they're hypocrites for wearing provocative clothing and then being upset if they're treated indecently or worse

No I'm not.

> If I'm rich and wave my money as I walk down the street, it's still a crime to rob me even if you feel as though I was asking for it.

I'm not saying otherwise.

This conversation is actually not a terrible example of my overall point.

Re: Reddit and the Struggle to Detoxify the Internet

#519

Post by larkeith »

Chathamization wrote: post #322
_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'd like to see what impact posting limits would have. For instance, let every user make 2 submissions and 10 comments in a month. One of the issues on every forum is that it takes a lot less time to make a ton of low effort comments than it does to make one thoughtful post. Another is that a small minority end up making the vast majority of the posts (even when that minority is well intentioned).

Another key factor is the community reaction to low-effort posts; Many users of social media are not looking for or willing to put in the time and effort to digest more in-depth discussion, and will happily skip over more thoughtful posts in favour of the next meme or bite-sized thought. In a platform such as Reddit, where votes per unit time are paramount, this results in the burying of most longer discussion.

Re: Reddit and the Struggle to Detoxify the Internet

#520

Post by timbo1642 »

Reddit has done nothing but censor. Its own CEO spez has edited comments of others. The mods have removed all the comments that don't fit their narrative or liking in every big news or political sub. Anything pro conservative or anti-liberal has been removed no matter how true it is.

Its pure censorship and nothing else. They even banned a complete subreddit because they found out the people that were working at reddit were removing things without the mods knowing about it and when they found out and proved it, they banned it the NEXT DAY.

Fuck reddit. It anti-free speech

Post reply on HN