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

941–950 of 975 posts

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#941

Post by bombcar »

Zak wrote: post #563
bombcar wrote: post #551

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, most people take the promotion spamming as the main one, but you can also refer to some forms of shitposting as spamming (join any twitch chat and watch whatever the current spam emoji is flood by) - but the second is more almost a form of cheering perhaps. If you wanted to divide it further I guess you could discuss "in-group spamming" and "out-group spamming" where almost all of the promotional stuff falls in…

I guess I'd describe repeatedly posting the same emoji to a chat as flooding rather than spamming. Even then, your mention of cheering further divides it into two categories of behavior: 1. Cheering. That's as good a description as any. This is intended to express excitement or approval and rally the in-group. It temporarily makes the chat useless for anything else, but that isn't its purpose. 2. Flooding. This is an…

Yeah - one thing I've noticed with some forums is that the addition of the "like/dislike" buttons (some have even more reactions available) greatly INCREASES the signal to noise ratio (I mean makes the forum have more signal, maybe I said it backwards) because the "me too" posts and the "fuck off" posts are reduced, you can just hit the button instead.

Some streaming platforms have a button you can hit that makes party emoji or heart emoji or whatever appear in a stream from the lower right, that's a similar thing which helps with cheering so you can then combat flooding.

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#942

Post by lupire »

MikePlacid wrote: post #853
tempestn wrote: post #810

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That seems like a bit of a strawman. There's a pretty significant difference between public and private speech. Regardless, I'm not arguing what or when these platforms should censor. Just trying to explain why certain content on a platform could cause someone to choose to stop using that platform, even if they're not personally exposed to that content.

> Just trying to explain why certain content on a platform could cause someone to choose to stop using that platform, even if they're not personally exposed to that content. This explanation seems pretty strange to me. 1. If I am not exposed to some content - how do I know that it exist? 2. If I see that platform does not delete an objectionable content and does not force me to contact it - I would feel much safer in…

Bad Twitter content spreads to infest mainstream media. Bad social media content led to an attack on the Capitol to overthrow the government.

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#943

Post by Zak »

bombcar wrote: post #941
Zak wrote: post #563

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess I'd describe repeatedly posting the same emoji to a chat as flooding rather than spamming. Even then, your mention of cheering further divides it into two categories of behavior: 1. Cheering. That's as good a description as any. This is intended to express excitement or approval and rally the in-group. It temporarily makes the chat useless for anything else, but that isn't its purpose. 2. Flooding. This is an…

Yeah - one thing I've noticed with some forums is that the addition of the "like/dislike" buttons (some have even more reactions available) greatly INCREASES the signal to noise ratio (I mean makes the forum have more signal, maybe I said it backwards) because the "me too" posts and the "fuck off" posts are reduced, you can just hit the button instead. Some streaming platforms have a button you can hit that makes par…

I've observed the same with Matrix and Discord. It reduces noise to the point that while "fuck off" would call for moderation in a lot of contexts, reacting with the middle finger emoji usually doesn't even though it has the same meaning.

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#944

Post by Fervicus »

hackerlight wrote: post #830
Fervicus wrote: post #823

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't have a reddit account, I just lurk without logging in. All the subreddits on the front page, which I assume are the default subreddits, sway the same way politically. Try commenting on r/news, r/worldnews, r/science or any of the front page subreddits with anything that doesn't match the party narrative and see how fast you get banned.

There are people on the far-left that say the same thing. Everyone with unhinged extremist views feels this way. That feeling by itself isn't data in support of the claim.

I am talking about any disagreement from the party line getting you banned, not "unhinged extremist views". The fact that you call it that highlights my initial point about political polarization very well. There are definitely subreddits on the other side of the political spectrum which also do the same thing. Point here is that the front page/default subreddits are curated with a clear politcal slant.

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#945

Post by bandyaboot »

krapp wrote: post #744
bandyaboot wrote: post #737

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to be conflating the general principles of free speech with the specific protections defined by the US first amendment.

There are no "general principles of free speech," there are conflicting principles over which people constantly disagree.

What now? You’re suggesting that the removal of the word “general” turns it into a concept that can exist and be disagreed upon? There can’t be conflicting general principles of free speech over which people consistently disagree? What a bizarre correction.

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#946

Post by dns_snek »

RugnirViking wrote: post #854
photochemsyn wrote: post #748

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This point he made aligns with non-specific features of user behavior: > "In fact, once again, I challenge you to think about it this way: could you make your content moderation decisions even if you didnʻt understand the language they were being spoken in?" However, I think discussions of controversial subjects often fall under 'this content is a problem' type of thinking. I was banned from all the major Reddit Covi…

you've been banned from EVERY major subreddit on all of those topics and you were just "politely noting" things? I struggle to believe you. Especially the one about noting economic causes of war...

You're surprised by the fact that subreddit moderators abuse their power to remove content and eventually ban users who post content they disagree with?

Dozens if not hundreds of popular subreddits even have bots in place that will automatically ban you from subreddit (A) if you ever engage on any "wrong-think" subreddit (B) in any capacity, even if you're not a member of subreddit (A).

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#947

Post by [deleted] »

JauntyHatAngle wrote: post #779
piskerpan wrote: post #758

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It lies in us. As despicable as Facebook is, I wish someone there would just come out and say “have you looked at yourself in the mirror?” It’s mindboggling to see them passively accept the questioning without mentioning that people are wolves and sheeples, and you don’t really need Facebook to join the two. Platforms like Facebook only bring us closer but the rotten core is within us.

People act based on circumstance. If there is a lot of food, people will lean towards sharing their food, and helping others - even anonymously in a truly "altruistic" sense. If everyone is starving, people will lean towards violence and stealing. Does this "expose the rotten core within us?", or is it just saying we have the capacity for both? If we were truly completely rotten we wouldn't share in either case. The…

[deleted]

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#948

Post by MarkMarine »

pksebben wrote: post #847
MarkMarine wrote: post #842

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think your proposed truth is always true, do you have any data to back that up?

they made a couple of statements. Which are you asking for clarification on?

If there is a lot of food, people will lean towards sharing their food, and helping others - even anonymously in a truly "altruistic" sense. If everyone is starving, people will lean towards violence and stealing.

This.

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#950

Post by ece »

Having read Yishan's older threads, the point he makes about spam is important, it's to increase people's comfort level with platforms. I think chat is maybe the easiest to feel comfortable on, then forums and social media platforms.

Every one is different and moderation isn't going to be to everyone's liking, but as long as it's encouraging respectful engagement and rejecting the trolls who show no such interest, there is enough social media for everyone who keeps an open mind on all sorts of subjects.

Post reply on HN