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

Study finds Reddit’s ban of its most toxic subreddits worked (2017)

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 413 posts

Re: Study finds Reddit’s ban of its most toxic subreddits worked (2017)

#281

Post by olefoo »

lazyjones wrote: post #64
antihero wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And it turns out that yes, voat and gab.ai are both filled with the utter dregs of society. Is this "free speech" positive hangout a wonderful paradise full of intellectuals and idealists? No, just a bunch of racist conspiracy nut trash.

> And it turns out that yes, voat and gab.ai are both filled with the utter dregs of society What does this say about the validity of the questionable study linked here that applauds "deplatforming" and only examines a few short-time consequences? Great success, sending more people from reddit to their own hate platform that will grow and exploit synergies among groups of particularly toxic people.

That we can identify potential school shooters, identity terrorists and other bad actors from their network traffic.

If Joe Bloke suddenly starts tunneling a lot of crap to 8chan... might be time for the constable to drop by for tea and persuasion.

Re: Study finds Reddit’s ban of its most toxic subreddits worked (2017)

#282

Post by whenchamenia »

faissaloo wrote: post #199
DataWorker wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like removing homeless people from your neighborhood by moving them to another?

Homeless people are not undeserving of things based o their actions, fascists are.

Nobody deserves to be deprived based on their political beliefs. Only actions. Thoughtcrime is bullshit, and I sure as hell don't see any active facists roaming the streets.

Re: Study finds Reddit’s ban of its most toxic subreddits worked (2017)

#283

Post by whenchamenia »

TheCondor wrote: post #130
pmarreck wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would like to see evidence that “deplatforming” actually reduces hate globally instead of simply moving it elsewhere, because I haven’t seen any, and until then this is simply an unfounded belief (i.e., “bullshit”)

Do you think having a president that has lent support to racism and white supremacy has changed the amount of racism or just revealed it?

Citation?

Re: Study finds Reddit’s ban of its most toxic subreddits worked (2017)

#284

Post by debaserab2 »

slothtrop wrote: post #266
joshuamorton wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you simultaneously believe that close proximity weakens this stuff, but that you can't accidentally stumble onto it? Make the proximity close enough, and it becomes mainstream content, which you appear to view as a bad thing. Those appear contradictory.

> but that you can't accidentally stumble onto it? Because even on a platform like reddit, these aren't front-page items nor anything that will casually be brought to attention. If you want to share piece of shit ideology, you have to find piece of shit subs, and they're micro communities. The reason I think the proximity in that instance helps is users are more likely to interact with users from other popular subs.…

You act like it isn't super easy to stumble upon these communities, but all it takes is having your curiosity piqued by an edgy-sounding comment that could be in any /r/all thread. You don't have to seek it out, you just have to be a naturally curious person and you can easily find yourself down a rabbit hole of hate speech filled individuals and communities.

Re: Study finds Reddit’s ban of its most toxic subreddits worked (2017)

#285

Post by taurath »

pmarreck wrote: post #94
sagichmal wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It "worked" only if the definition is "it removed it from Reddit". As the article mentions, these people did not just disappear or change their mind. They just moved to more obscure places, where they can continue and be evem more motivated, because now they have been censored. What about all of the new people who would have more easily stumbled into those cesspools, but now have to take quite a bit more effort, an…

I would like to see evidence that “deplatforming” actually reduces hate globally instead of simply moving it elsewhere, because I haven’t seen any, and until then this is simply an unfounded belief (i.e., “bullshit”)

You’re making a strawman argument. There’s no question that it’s made Reddit a better place - marginalizing hate communities is something most people would agree is a good thing. There’s a reason there’s no ISIS subreddit, as an example. Giving equal billing to hate communities is normalizing them.

Re: Study finds Reddit’s ban of its most toxic subreddits worked (2017)

#286

Post by whenchamenia »

olefoo wrote: post #281
lazyjones wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And it turns out that yes, voat and gab.ai are both filled with the utter dregs of society What does this say about the validity of the questionable study linked here that applauds "deplatforming" and only examines a few short-time consequences? Great success, sending more people from reddit to their own hate platform that will grow and exploit synergies among groups of particularly toxic people.

That we can identify potential school shooters, identity terrorists and other bad actors from their network traffic. If Joe Bloke suddenly starts tunneling a lot of crap to 8chan... might be time for the constable to drop by for tea and persuasion.

Thats really worrying that guilt by association and thoughtceome is still a thing.

Isnt that just a more powerful soft censorship tool?

Re: Study finds Reddit’s ban of its most toxic subreddits worked (2017)

#287

Post by X6S1x6Okd1st »

pmarreck wrote: post #94
sagichmal wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It "worked" only if the definition is "it removed it from Reddit". As the article mentions, these people did not just disappear or change their mind. They just moved to more obscure places, where they can continue and be evem more motivated, because now they have been censored. What about all of the new people who would have more easily stumbled into those cesspools, but now have to take quite a bit more effort, an…

I would like to see evidence that “deplatforming” actually reduces hate globally instead of simply moving it elsewhere, because I haven’t seen any, and until then this is simply an unfounded belief (i.e., “bullshit”)

The argument before the deplatforming was that those users would just recreate accounts & post on other, less well known, subreddits.

Could you think of a reasonably achivable study that would be able to falsify your belief that deplatforming doesn't reduce global hate?

Re: Study finds Reddit’s ban of its most toxic subreddits worked (2017)

#289

Post by whenchamenia »

glenstein wrote: post #116

There's a predictable cycle each time you ban toxic users. There is a core of incredibly toxic users, surrounded by a halo of sympathizers. When the toxic users get banned, the sympathizers will argue in bad faith, moving heaven and Earth to insist that the ban was either unfair, inconsistent, ineffectual, or extreme, or a violation of their interpretation of free speech. To whatever extent there was an actual debate…

So a free speech advocate is in bad faith in your mind?

Re: Study finds Reddit’s ban of its most toxic subreddits worked (2017)

#290

Post by walls »

cannedslime wrote: post #162
r3bl wrote: post #15

> Migration was common, both to similar subreddits (i.e. overtly racist ones) and tangentially related ones (r/The_Donald). Tangentially-related? I'm pretty sure this crosses the line of being tangentially-related to racism. https://i.redd.it/ua1ukmoi8ls21.jpg

You realize anyone can post anything on reddit? I could go to /r/SandersForPresident and LARP as a violent communist revolutionary, right this moment if I wanted to.

You could, but you wouldn't get 40 upvotes.
Post reply on HN