“Twitter will be forming a content moderation council with diverse viewpoints” • Hacker News Board

Re: “Twitter will be forming a content moderation council with diverse viewpoints”

#501

Post by Zagill » Fri, Oct 28, 2022, 10:21 PM UTC

mildmotive wrote: post #404

DoctorNick wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Babylon Bee being suspended was one of the dumber things the previous Twitter rules had done. It's a satire site, it's right leaning, nothing in the piece they said was hateful or even an unpopular view. They didn’t even make a joke. They just called trans woman a man. It was hate speech, pure and simple. I am very afraid for the future of twitter now. Hate speech is going to run rampant on that platform now.

> They didn’t even make a joke. They just called trans woman a man. It was hate speech, pure and simple. It’s not a crime nor hate speech to acknowledge someone’s biological sex. That’s what we do in sports and when we select partners for example. Most, if not all heterosexual men would not consider a “trans woman” to be an actual woman. Our way of selecting partners is proof of that. To punish a natural, and biologi…

How are we this far into the modern trans rights movement and people still haven't wrapped their brains around sex and gender being two distinct concepts?

Re: “Twitter will be forming a content moderation council with diverse viewpoints”

#502

Post by mikkergp » Fri, Oct 28, 2022, 10:22 PM UTC

bmitc wrote: post #473

mikkergp wrote: post #450

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He still has a fiduciary duty since he's not the sole shareholder though.

Who are the other shareholders? I thought the entire point of the purchase is that he bought out all the shareholders.

Maybe shareholders was the wrong term, doesn’t he have a duty to like the banks and Saudis and other investors

Re: “Twitter will be forming a content moderation council with diverse viewpoints”

#503

Post by yibg » Fri, Oct 28, 2022, 10:22 PM UTC

mytailorisrich wrote: post #268

fasthands9 wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think one reasonable policy could be "form a council of diverse viewpoints and only ban someone if they all (or mostly all) agree the person should be kicked off" and another reasonable policy could be "form a council fo diverse viewpoints and ban someone if one (or a couple) think the person should be kicked off. I think its fair to say the committee will end up being a scapegoat - but to be charitable to the idea…

Twitter has become the de facto standard, so IMHO moderation should only ask one question: "is this tweet legal?" If the answer is 'yes' then it should be allowed. Of course, a corollary is that they should be able to filter content on a per country basis because, obviously, what's legal differs from country to country, but I think there is no escaping that for any platforms which claim to be global.

Do you have any example of an open forum that only removes illegal content and nothing else that isn't also a complete cesspool?

Re: “Twitter will be forming a content moderation council with diverse viewpoints”

#504

Post by philosopher1234 » Fri, Oct 28, 2022, 10:23 PM UTC

hitpointdrew wrote: post #421

virgildotcodes wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To echo the person you're responding to, what have you actually done to date to "improv[e] opportunities for minorities, and spend a substantial amount of your time taking action to try and solve that problem"? Saying you will take hypothetical action is easy, but all that matters is what you've actually done and are doing. If you haven't taken any substantial action to date then perhaps consider that may be a sign t…

I am not saying I will take hypothetical action. I will take real action. But I need evidence that systemic racism exists, you need to point to something and say “that right there is a racist law/policy”. I have thus far seen no such laws or policies. And please, don’t start with a conclusion (there are only X number of PoC CEO’s or something) and then go on a witch hunt to prove your conclusion. That is not how reas…

Have you spent any time researching it at all? Do you have any curiosity about it? You're delusional.

Re: “Twitter will be forming a content moderation council with diverse viewpoints”

#505

Post by mlindner » Fri, Oct 28, 2022, 10:24 PM UTC

jszymborski wrote: post #25

mikkergp wrote: post #7

This sort of justifies the viewpoint that despite all his bluster, Elon will probably run Twitter the way a "reasonable executive" would. Not just release the hounds. Keep the advertisers happy, but try to reduce the reliance on advertisers. Keep moderating content to reduce abuse, maybe eliminate the high profile banning but a person on the ground will have largely the same experience. (probably less action on more…

A bunch of accounts like The Babylon Bee and Ye have been unbanned w/o input from any such committee of diverse viewpoints. I don't have much faith that Musk will not act unilaterally in service of his friends and allies.

Babylon Bee was never unbanned (because they were never banned in the first place, just suspended and continue to be suspended) and Ye was unbanned before Elon Musk ever took over.

Re: “Twitter will be forming a content moderation council with diverse viewpoints”

#506

Post by cm42 » Fri, Oct 28, 2022, 10:24 PM UTC

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #169

HelloMcFly wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Boy oh boy, I should take you to some Board of Education meetings.

These are actually fine in most places. You only see videos of the out of control ones because they're the weird ones. If you only view the world through the snippets that are noteworthy enough to make headlines or get a lot of votes on Reddit, you end up with a very skewed view of what the world is like.

No post body was provided.

Re: “Twitter will be forming a content moderation council with diverse viewpoints”

#507

Post by ajross » Fri, Oct 28, 2022, 10:24 PM UTC

partiallypro wrote: post #441

slg wrote: post #432

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It has only been very, very recently that we have gone from... Would you have said the same thing about ridiculing someone for being openly gay in government 30 years ago, being Catholic in government 60 years ago, or being Black in government 80 years ago?

No, because those aren't even remotely similar things. It wouldn't be a "hate crime" to call a Catholic a Protestant, or a Gay person a Straight person or a Black person a white person. It would be a hateful to deny them rights or to call for abuse. In this instance the "hate crime" is merely saying someone's biological sex is x, even if they say they are y. However, If I called a non-trans woman a man or a non-trans…

> In this instance the "hate crime" is merely saying someone's biological sex is x, even if they say they are y.

That's mischaracterizing what was said. Here's the actual article: https://babylonbee.com/news/the-babylon-bees-man-of-the-year...

This is ridicule, quite clearly. I won't get into the "is it or is it not a hate crime" bit, but this isn't "merely" stating anything. The term "biological sex" doesn't even appear in the article. The point the reader is supposed to take from this article is quite clearly not "mere" information about Rachel Levine's gender and/or "biological sex". It's that Rachel Levine's presented gender was very funny to the authors and that we should laugh at her for it.

> Would I want someone intentionally misgendering them just to get to them? No, I think that's cruel

Seems like you're putting an awful lot of weight on the distinction between "hate" and "cruel" to me.

What about here on HN? Do you think it's OK for users here to be "cruel" to others, or should dang ban them? Because HN bans people for being cruel, probably every day. Why is Twitter different?

Re: “Twitter will be forming a content moderation council with diverse viewpoints”

#508

Post by ModernMech » Fri, Oct 28, 2022, 10:25 PM UTC

incomingpain wrote: post #364

kranke155 wrote: post #218

It’s amazing to me that the HN hive mind has decided that somehow one of the most successful people on the planet, who’s built a successful electric car company, a private rocketry company and was part of the people who laid foundation for a “payment system for the internet” is somehow doomed to fail in his new venture. The excitement for this new move seems not just low here but overwhelmingly negative. “It can’t be…

>It’s amazing to me that the HN hive mind has decided that somehow one of the most successful people on the planet, who’s built a successful electric car company, a private rocketry company and was part of the people who laid foundation for a “payment system for the internet” is somehow doomed to fail in his new venture. It has been interesting to read it today. Fundamentally elon has simply called for politically ne…

> I expect he's never going to allow calls to violence or incitement type things; who exactly thinks this is a bad decision? … Is giving the republicans their voice back and allowing them to speak really such a nightmare?

Well let’s see… last time the former President was using his voice on Twitter, he was inciting and directing an insurrection against the government. So if Musk wants to reverse that ban, and Trump decides to continue his rhetoric which already caused violence (which he will because he hasn’t stopped since 1/6), then yeah, that’s a nightmare.

Re: “Twitter will be forming a content moderation council with diverse viewpoints”

#509

Post by jeffbee » Fri, Oct 28, 2022, 10:26 PM UTC

concinds wrote: post #297

jeffbee wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

See, this right here is where you lost me. > fewer algorithmic recommendations and push less "controversial" or popular content onto users' feeds. There is not ANY 'algorithmic' content on my Twitter feed. Zero! What are you referring to?!

I'm not referring to the "X liked this tweet" feature, which is from my circle. Twitter added a Topics feature, where it promotes popular tweets. I'll often see random tweets with >100k likes inserted into my feed, though none of the people I follow liked it, and it's not in my interests. You'll also see such "popular tweets" when you click on any tweet and scroll past the replies. Doesn't always show (especially whe…

> Twitter added a Topics feature, where it promotes popular tweets.

I have never seen this. It turns out to be buried under a "more" menu, so I maintain that this is a niche feature that you'd need to go out of your way to suffer.

> You'll also see such "popular tweets" when you click on any tweet and scroll past the replies.

No, I don't. I don't see anything like that. I just get to the bottom of the replies. When do you see this? I don't even see it on a tweet with zero replies. No random tweets, just blank space.

Re: “Twitter will be forming a content moderation council with diverse viewpoints”

#510

Post by duxup » Fri, Oct 28, 2022, 10:26 PM UTC

imgabe wrote: post #460

duxup wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>maybe eliminate the high profile banning but a person on the ground will have largely the same experience It's either going to be a double standard or not. I moderated a busy gaming site for years. Users have nothing to do but re-post what got someone else banned and then complain things aren't consistent. I would find the idea that a politician gets to say things, but I don't completely absurd.

I don’t understand. Are you saying that they repost something that got someone banned, they don’t get banned, and then they complain that it’s inconsistent? Why not ban the reposters?

Kids upset about moderation are not logical.

Every scenario you can imagine happens.