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

Telling users why their content was removed reduces future issues [pdf]

shagunjhaver.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 154 posts

Re: Telling users why their content was removed reduces future issues [pdf]

#61

Post by eloisant »

bchimp wrote: post #52

The paper (and I only read the abstract) is interesting, but as others have noted, fairly obvious. One thing that seems to be an assumption is that the "company" needs to provide the explanation. I think it is even better if the user provides the explanation. The assumption a user can't provide it is probably because we've all seen Terms of Service agreements that are totally opaque. Back in the day when I was doing…

Sounds like the old cop tactic to get users to confess violations you didn't know about...

Re: Telling users why their content was removed reduces future issues [pdf]

#62

Post by tom_mellior »

tlb wrote: post #51

The HN mods generally try to explain why they remove unacceptable comments, if the comment seems like it's from an actual person trying to participate. Also, we summarily one-click-delete lots of spam. Those would also correlate "telling why content was removed" with "reduced future issues". But the causality goes the other way. Users that are likely to participate better in the future are more likely to get explanat…

> The HN mods generally try to explain why they remove unacceptable comments, if the comment seems like it's from an actual person trying to participate.

This is a good policy, thank you for doing it this way.

Personally I feel that something along the lines of an explanation should also go with downvotes. When I'm downvoted, I would like some feedback on what people didn't like about my post -- do they think I was rude? or did I write something that is wrong, or at least, would need a source to back it up? Similarly, I would also like to give such feedback when I downvote. But downvoting and posting about it is not welcomed by the community.

On Slashdot there is (was?) a rough category to go along with votes, so you could upvote something because it's "informative" or "funny", and downvote because it's "flamebait" or... I don't remember the others. Something like this would make a very useful addition to HN, I feel. The feedback could of course be optional, and only visible to the poster, like the actual score on a post.

Please?

Re: Telling users why their content was removed reduces future issues [pdf]

#63

Post by kiba »

saagarjha wrote: post #10
Ididntdothis wrote: post #7

There seems to be a general trend to avoid explanations in a lot of areas. For example, you often get no feedback after job interviews. Google just canceled my Drive subscription after 10 years without telling why but they offered me to sign up again. No idea why and support wouldn’t tell. How are people supposed to learn and improve without knowing told what they did wrong?

I think the reasons nobody tells you anything anymore is because doing so would open you up to liability. It’s probably a similar thing to why you’re not told the reasons for not getting a job, even though it’s somewhat unfortunate that it means useful context is lost…

People think they will be exposed to liability and think they will get more lawsuits.

It doesn't mean that their current behavior actually reduce risk.

Re: Telling users why their content was removed reduces future issues [pdf]

#64

Post by jstanley »

bchimp wrote: post #52

The paper (and I only read the abstract) is interesting, but as others have noted, fairly obvious. One thing that seems to be an assumption is that the "company" needs to provide the explanation. I think it is even better if the user provides the explanation. The assumption a user can't provide it is probably because we've all seen Terms of Service agreements that are totally opaque. Back in the day when I was doing…

It also only works if they agree that they actually did violate your TOS.

I assume the response "sorry, I looked at your TOS and don't see the problem" would not result in getting their account reinstated.

Re: Telling users why their content was removed reduces future issues [pdf]

#65

Post by JimboOmega »

bchimp wrote: post #52

The paper (and I only read the abstract) is interesting, but as others have noted, fairly obvious. One thing that seems to be an assumption is that the "company" needs to provide the explanation. I think it is even better if the user provides the explanation. The assumption a user can't provide it is probably because we've all seen Terms of Service agreements that are totally opaque. Back in the day when I was doing…

I assume most TOS are just a blob of legalese, and not a "this is what it means to behave on this server".

It feels like the trend has been in the other direction. In most services I've interacted with recently, the service often doesn't even tell you that the content has been removed, let alone why. One example is Discord - if a mod removes a comment you made, it just disappears. You might try to repost it, thinking it failed to send. Similarly if you are removed from a server, it simply disappears from your list. This kind of thing is very frustrating/confusing - not that I expect a mod to necessarily provide explanation (though, that's nice) but at least the service saying "hey, that got removed" prevents me from trying to repost it.

The usual explanation involves spammers/scammers. Something like, if they know they got removed for violating some rule or the other, they can use that information to work around it in their next attempt. But for actual human users it can be very frustrating.

Re: Telling users why their content was removed reduces future issues [pdf]

#66

Post by [deleted] »

kd5bjo wrote: post #23
saagarjha wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the reasons nobody tells you anything anymore is because doing so would open you up to liability. It’s probably a similar thing to why you’re not told the reasons for not getting a job, even though it’s somewhat unfortunate that it means useful context is lost…

I suspect that often the reason for not getting a job is simply that there were more qualified candidates than positions. In that case, there may be no reasons to give; someone else was selected but your application wasn’t deficient in any way.

[deleted]

Re: Telling users why their content was removed reduces future issues [pdf]

#67

Post by Karunamon »

Arnt wrote: post #14
woliveirajr wrote: post #2

It seems so obvious that it's a pitty it wasn't studied before. It doesn't work just online: ask a children to solve some problem in a blackboard and then erase it without telling a thing, while leaving answers from other kids on it. You'll see that nobody likes to be "corrected" without an explanation.

Noone likes to be corrected without an explanation. That part is fine. But explaining takes time for the moderators as well as providing value to the user, and some users try to get past moderation by overwhelming the moderators. Spamming.

In the cases of places like Reddit, there are addons like Mod Toolbox that place canned messages messages into the removal workflow, so there’s little reason to ever silently delete things.

Re: Telling users why their content was removed reduces future issues [pdf]

#68

Post by Karunamon »

roel_v wrote: post #36
300bps wrote: post #4

I can’t imagine what it’s like to moderate large sites like HN. I read it with Show Dead turned on and I’m amazed at how many people have been shadow banned with no clue they’ve been posting frequently for years with no idea 99% of people will never see what they wrote. In most cases it looks like dang does give them a reason when they’re banned but I don’t think many of them read it.

Dumb question - how can you tell what posts are from shadowbanned people?

Turn on showdead in your options and click on the name of someone with a dead comment, their history will show all of their comments in the same condition.

Re: Telling users why their content was removed reduces future issues [pdf]

#69

Post by AegirLeet »

saagarjha wrote: post #10
Ididntdothis wrote: post #7

There seems to be a general trend to avoid explanations in a lot of areas. For example, you often get no feedback after job interviews. Google just canceled my Drive subscription after 10 years without telling why but they offered me to sign up again. No idea why and support wouldn’t tell. How are people supposed to learn and improve without knowing told what they did wrong?

I think the reasons nobody tells you anything anymore is because doing so would open you up to liability. It’s probably a similar thing to why you’re not told the reasons for not getting a job, even though it’s somewhat unfortunate that it means useful context is lost…

The other reason they don't tell you is because they don't know. It's automated systems making automated decisions sending out automated notifications all the way down.

Re: Telling users why their content was removed reduces future issues [pdf]

#70

Post by jakobegger »

jstanley wrote: post #64
bchimp wrote: post #52

The paper (and I only read the abstract) is interesting, but as others have noted, fairly obvious. One thing that seems to be an assumption is that the "company" needs to provide the explanation. I think it is even better if the user provides the explanation. The assumption a user can't provide it is probably because we've all seen Terms of Service agreements that are totally opaque. Back in the day when I was doing…

It also only works if they agree that they actually did violate your TOS. I assume the response "sorry, I looked at your TOS and don't see the problem" would not result in getting their account reinstated.

That's probably a good thing. If people can't figure out which rule they broke, then they don't understand the rules, and they'll probably break them again soon.

(of course, if everyone complains that they don't see the problem, then maybe it's the mod that doesn't understand the rules, or the rules are ambiguous)

Post reply on HN