So what I’m hearing is that ads are moderated spam. Yeah, I can see that.
Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation
321–330 of 975 posts
Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation
#322These random detours into climate-related topics are insanely disruptive of an otherwise interesting essay. I absolutely hate this pattern. I see what he's trying to do - you don't want to read about climate change but you want to read this other thing so I'm going to mix them together so you can't avoid the one if you want the other - but it's an awful dark pattern and makes for a frustrating and confusing reading e…
Since the argument was so well-structured, the interim detour to climate related topics was odd. The very argument was that spam can be detected by posting behaviors, yet the author engaged in those for his favored topic.
Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation
#323Earlier quoted context omitted.
Charge them $10 to create an account (anonymous, real, parody whatever), then if they break a rule give them a warning, 2 rule breaks, a 24 hour posting suspension, 3 strikes and permanently ban the account. Let them reregister for $10. Congrats, i just solved spam, bots, assholes and permanent line steppers.
You solved bots, but destroyed the product.
I mean, who here remembers app.net? Love the Garry Tan endorsement! https://web.archive.org/web/20120903182620/https://join.app....
EDIT: Lol Dalton's PART of YC now. Hey dude, why not pitch it then
Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation
#324Every single social media platform that has ever existed makes the same fundamental mistake. They believe that they just have to remove or block the bad actors and bad content and that will make the platform good. The reality is everyone , myself included, can be and will be a bad actor. How do you build and run a "social media" product when the very act of letting anyone respond to anyone with anything is itself the…
It sounds like a insurmountable problem. What makes this even more interesting to me is that HN seems to have this working pretty well. I wonder how much of it has to do with clear guidelines of what should be valued and what shouldn't and having a community that buys in to that. For example one learns quickly that Reddit-style humor comments are frowned upon because the community enforces it with downvotes and frequ…
I have a suspicion that the medium is the message at HN:
No pictures and no avatars.
I wonder how much bad behavior is weeded out by the interface itself ?
A lot, I suspect …
Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation
#325Correct me if I'm wrong, but this sounds very much like what dang does here.
Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation
#326I like yishan's content and his climate focus, but this "we interrupt your tweet thread for sponsored content" style tangent is a bit annoying - not directly for doing it or its content, but because I can see other thread writers picking this up and we end up the same as Youtube with sponsored sections of content that you can't ad block . FWIW With YT you can block them with Sponsorblock, which works with user submit…
>, but this "we interrupt your tweet thread for sponsored content" style tangent is a bit annoying
It is annoying but it can be seen as part of his argument. How can spam be moderated if even trustworthy creators create spam?
According to him, it's not spam because it doesn't fulfill the typical patterns of spam, which shows that identifying noise does require knowledge of the language.
It could be interesting to turn his argument around. Instead of trying to remove all spam, a platform could offer the tools to handle all forms of spam and let its users come up with clever ways to use those tools.
Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation
#327There seem to be no mention of (de)centralization or use of reputation in the comments here or in the twitter thread.
Everyone is discussing a failure mode of a centralized and centrally moderated system and aren't questioning those properties, but it's really counter to traditional internet based communication platforms like email, usenet, irc etc.
Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation
#328Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you have more info on why you believe this? My experience has been that Google successfully filters spam from my Inbox, consistently. I get (just looked) 30-40 spam messages a day. I've been on Gmail since the invite-only days, so I'm in a lot of lists I guess.. Very Very rarely do they get through the filter. I also check it every couple of days to look for false-positives, and maybe once a month or less I find a…
Just see what gets through and more importantly which valid mails are being marked as spam. It is evident that they haven't got a clue. So, how do they "solve" it? By using the "reputation" of your IP addresses and trust that more than the content of the email.
You’re talking way too hyperbolically to take seriously.
Yes, GMail does, in fact, “have a clue.” They do pretty well. They’re not perfect, and I have specific complaints, but to pretend they’re totally clueless and inept discredits anything else you’re saying.
Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation
#329Re: "Hereʻs the answer everyone knows: there IS no principled reason for banning spam." The author is making the mistake that "free speech" has been about saying whatever you want and whenever you want. This was never the case, including at the time of the founding of the U.S. constitution. There has always been a tolerance window which defines what you can say and what you can't say without repercussions, often and…
I think that's a mischaracterization of what was written about spam.
The author wrote that most people don't consider banning spam to be free speech infringement because the act of moderating spam has nothing to do with the content and everything to do with the posting behavior in the communication medium.
The author then uses that point to draw logical conclusions about other moderation activity.
Leading with a strawman weakens your argument, I think.
Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation
#330Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is something Riot Games has spoken on, the observation that ordinary participants can have a bad day here or there, and that forgiving corrections can preserve their participation while reducing future incidents.
Did Riot eventually sort out the toxic community? If so that would be amazing, and definitely relevant. I stopped playing when it was still there, and it was a big part of the reason I stopped.
I’ve been playing very very active from 2010 to 2014 and since then on-off, sometimes skipping a season.
Recently picked it up again and I noticed that I didn’t had to use /mute all anymore. I’ve got all-chat disabled by default so I’ve got no experience there, but overall I’d say it has come a long way.
But I’d also say it depends which mode and MMR you are in. I mostly play draft pick normals or ARAMs in which I both have a lot of games played - I heard from a mate that chat is unbearable in low level games.