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

Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

511–520 of 975 posts

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#511

Post by luckylion »

ChainOfFools wrote: post #421
rsync wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 …

> No pictures and no avatars This is essentially moderation rule #0. it is unwritten, enforced before violation can occur, and generates zero complaints because it filters complainers out of the user pool from the start.

The no-avatars rule also takes away some of the personalization aspect. If you set your account up with your nickname, your fancy unique profile picture and your favorite quote in the signature, and someone says you're wrong, you're much more invested because you've tied some of your identity to the account.

If you've just arrived on the site, have been given a random name and someone says you're wrong, what do you care? You're not attached to that account at all, it's not "you", it's just a random account on a random website.

I thought that was an interesting point on 4chan (and probably other sites before them), that your identity was set per thread (iirc they only later introduced the ability to have permanent accounts). That removes the possibility of you becoming attached to the random name.

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#512

Post by mjjjjjjj »

brookst wrote: post #481
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…

Maybe? Reputation systems can devolve into rewarding groupthink. It's a classic "you get what you measure" conundrum, where once it becomes clear that an opinion / phrase / meme is popular, it's easy to farm reputation by repeating it. I like your comment about "track record of insightful, levelheaded conversation", but that introduces another abstraction. Who measures insight or levelheadedness, and how to avoid tha…

This is pure hypothetical, but I bet Reddit could derive an internal reputational number that is a combination of both karma (free and potentially farmable) and awards (that people actually pay for or that are scarce and shows what they value) that would be a better signal to noise ratio than just karma alone.

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#513

Post by Fervicus »

kodt wrote: post #434
blfr wrote: post #246

> Because it is not TOPICS that are censored. It is BEHAVIOR. > (This is why people on the left and people on the right both think they are being targeted) An enticing idea but simply not the case for any popular existing social network. And it's triply not true on yishan's reddit which both through administrative measures and moderation culture targets any and all communities that do not share the favoured new-left…

There are plenty of right wing / politically conservative subs.

Funny that you never see them on the front page.

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#514

Post by bombcar »

kodt wrote: post #449
zcombynator wrote: post #384

Spam is unwelcommed for a simple reason: there is no real person behind it.

Not always true. In fact often spam is simply self-promotion by the person posting it.

In fact that type of spam is more annoying than the BUY @#$@$ NOW generic bot-spam, as it is way more insidious.

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#516

Post by TulliusCicero »

whatshisface wrote: post #507
TulliusCicero wrote: post #472

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm confused, do you think some individual leaving is a failure state? Realistically I don't think you can avoid banning or pissing some people off as a moderator, at least in most cases. There's a lot of people whose behavior on internet message boards/chat groups can be succinctly summarized as, "they're an asshole." Now maybe IRL they're a perfectly fine person, but for whatever reason they just engage like an dis…

The person leaving is the least bad part of what happened in the OP's example, try reading this again?: > In first incident I chose to ignore a certain user being targeted by others for posting repeated messages. The person left a very angry message and left.

They have three examples, and all of them ended with the person leaving; it just sounded to me like they were implying that the person leaving represented a failure on their part as a moderator. That, had they moderated better, they could've prevented people leaving.

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#517

Post by [deleted] »

skissane wrote: post #379
thepasswordis wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How old are you? An adult running a discord server for mentally ill teenagers seems like a cautionary tale from the 1990s about chatrooms.

> An adult running a discord server for mentally ill teenagers seems like a cautionary tale from the 1990s about chatrooms It sounds like a potential setup for exploitation, grooming, cult recruitment, etc. (Not saying the grandparent is doing this, for all I know their intentions are entirely above board-but other people out there likely are doing it for these kinds of reasons.)

[deleted]

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#518

Post by ineptech »

archagon wrote: post #405
throw_m239339 wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

r/politics is “communist”? That’s… just a really dumb take. If there is a far-left presence on Reddit, it is not prominent. r/politics is left-leaning and angry, but, objectively speaking, not really all that extreme. And, for what it’s worth, it seems perfectly reasonable to label those who tried to overthrow our democratic government “traitors”.

This kind of sentiment always shows up in this kind of thread; I think a lot of people don't really grok that being far enough to one side causes an unbiased forum to appear biased against you. If you hate X enough, Reddit and Twitter are going to seem pro-X, regardless of what X is.

(And, separately, almost no one who argues about anything being "communist" is using the same definition of that word as the person they're arguing with, but that's a different problem entirely)

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#519

Post by bombcar »

onetimeusename wrote: post #307

free speech might be self regulating. A place that gets excessive spam attracts no one and then there wouldn't be much motivation to spam it anymore. I don't recall spam restrictions on old IRC. A moderator could boot you off. My own theory is having an exponential cool off timer on posts could be the only thing needed that still is technically 100% free speech.

IRC had tons of independent little servers doing their own thing.

We have huge companies spanning the entire globe; if you get banned from one you're out world-wide.

This is where federation can help, IF it truly is a bunch of smaller servers rather than ending up one large one.

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#520

Post by whatshisface »

TulliusCicero wrote: post #516
whatshisface wrote: post #507

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The person leaving is the least bad part of what happened in the OP's example, try reading this again?: > In first incident I chose to ignore a certain user being targeted by others for posting repeated messages. The person left a very angry message and left.

They have three examples, and all of them ended with the person leaving; it just sounded to me like they were implying that the person leaving represented a failure on their part as a moderator. That, had they moderated better, they could've prevented people leaving.

Each of the examples had something bad happen in the lead-up to the person leaving.
Post reply on HN