Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation • Hacker News Board

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#461

Post by wwweston » Thu, Nov 03, 2022, 8:40 PM UTC

ptero wrote: post #364

This topic was adjacent to the sugar and L-isomer comments. Which probably influenced my viewpoint: Yishan is saying that Twitter (and other social networks) moderate bad behavior, not bad content. They just strive for higher SNR. It is just that specific types of content seems to be disproportionately responsible for starting bad behavior in discussions; and thus get banned. Sounds rational and while potentially sli…

> a lot of content, however well presented and rationally argued, just cannot be digested.

Can you name the topic areas where even cautious presentation will not be sustained on twitter?

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#462

Post by afiori » Thu, Nov 03, 2022, 8:40 PM UTC

bambax wrote: post #244

jameskilton wrote: post #9

Every 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…

You're confusing bad actors with bad behavior . Bad behavior is something good people do from time to time because they get really worked up about a specific topic or two. Bad actors are people who act bad all the time. There may be some of those but they're not the majority by far (and yes, sometimes normal people turn into bad actors because they get upset about a given thing that they can't talk about anything els…

I think you agree with the parent.

They pointed out that everybody can be a bad actor and you will not find a way to get better users.

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#463

Post by spaced-out » Thu, Nov 03, 2022, 8:41 PM UTC

tick_tock_tick wrote: post #355

threeseed wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're not Twitter's customer. Advertisers are. And they don't want their brands to be associated with unpleasant content.

Most customers don't care the only reason it's a real issue is Twitter users run the marketing department at a lot of companies and they are incorrectly convinced people care.

>Most customers don't care

How much is "most"? What data do you have? Plus, even if ~20% of customers care and only half will boycott, that's still going to have an impact on the company's bottom line.

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#464

Post by SV_BubbleTime » Thu, Nov 03, 2022, 8:42 PM UTC

pixl97 wrote: post #266

pessimizer wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It resulted in rampant child pornography, doxxing, death threats, gory violence etc. It epitomised the worst of humanity. It resulted in reddit. That style of moderation is how reddit became reddit; so it should also get credit for whatever you think is good about reddit. The new (half-decade old) reddit moderation regime was a new venture that was hoping to retain users who were initially attracted by the old mode…

You mean it resulted in the place that couldn't pay the bills and goes around asking for VC money to keep the servers on? Unmoderated hell holes tend to have to survive on questionable funding and rarely grow to any size.

If there is one thing I know about tech companies in the last 20 years, it's that they never want VC money unless they are in trouble... right?

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#465

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Nov 03, 2022, 8:43 PM UTC

archagon wrote: post #389

gambler wrote: post #365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He is half-correct, but not in a good way. When people on the left say something that goes against new-left agenda, they get suppressed too. That is not a redeeming quality of the system or an indicator of fairness. It simply shows that the ideology driving moderation is even more narrow-minded and intolerant of dissent than most observers assume at first sight. At the same time, it's trivial to demonstrate that YouT…

Or consider that perhaps the right in particular tends to harbor and support people who lean more towards disinformation, hate speech, and incitement to violence.

[deleted]

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#466

Post by int_19h » Thu, Nov 03, 2022, 8:44 PM UTC

tedunangst wrote: post #460

int_19h wrote: post #415

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is solved by allowing people to "hire" others as their moderators.

Why can't I "hire" (join) a social network that preemptively mods according to my preferences?

Because there are too few, due to market dominance of existing players?

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#467

Post by cvwright » Thu, Nov 03, 2022, 8:45 PM UTC

lancesells wrote: post #336

etchalon wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You solved bots, but destroyed the product.

I don't even know if it solved bots. Rich countries, rich organizations, rich people could do a lot. $100M would buy you 10M bots.

I think the idea is that it shifts the incentives. Sure, a rich nation state could buy tons of bot accounts at $10 a pop. But is that still the most rational path to their goal? Probably not, because there are lots of other things you can do for $100M.

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#468

Post by rootusrootus » Thu, Nov 03, 2022, 8:45 PM UTC

modeless wrote: post #454

It seems like he's arguing that people claiming moderation is censoring them are wrong, because moderation of large platforms is dispassionate and focused on limiting behavior no one likes, rather than specific topics. I have no problem believing this is true for the vast majority of moderation decisions. But I think the argument fails because it only takes a few exceptions or a little bit of bias in this process to…

Could also be that some objectionable behavior patterns are much more common in some ideological groups than others, which makes it appear as if the moderation is biased against them. It is, just not in the way they think.

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#469

Post by anigbrowl » Thu, Nov 03, 2022, 8:45 PM UTC

baby wrote: post #395

billiam wrote: post #361

The best part of his engrossing Twitter thread is that he inserts a multitweet interstitial "ad" for his passion project promoting reforestation right in the middle of his spiel.

that's the best approach to growth: 1. find what's trendy 2. talk about what's trendy 3. in the middle or at the end of that, talk about how that relates to you and your work

I'm sure it works across the population at large but I avoid doing business with people who engage in that kind of manipulation. They're fundamentally untrustworthy in my experience.

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#470

Post by paul7986 » Thu, Nov 03, 2022, 8:46 PM UTC

dbrueck wrote: post #458

At least one missing element is that of reputation . I don't think it should work exactly like it does in the real world, but the absence of it seems to always lead to major problems. The cost of being a jerk online is too low - it's almost entirely free of any consequences. Put another way, not everyone deserves a megaphone. Not everyone deserves to chime in on any conversation they want. The promise of online discu…

The Internet needs to have a verified public identity / reputation system especially with deep fakes becoming more and more pervasive/easier to create. Trolls can troll all they want but if they want to be serious with their words then back it up with his or her online verified public Internet /reputation ID.

If this is one of Musk's goals with Twitter he didn't overpay. The Internet definitely needs such a system..has for awhile now!

He might connect Twitter into the crypto ecosystem and that along with a verified public Internet / Reputation ID system i think could be powerful.