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

Show HN: Reveddit.com: Improving online discourse with transparent moderation

cantsayanything.win

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 188 posts

Re: Show HN: Reveddit.com: Improving online discourse with transparent moderation

#41

Post by i67vw3 »

rhaksw wrote: post #25
i67vw3 wrote: post #22

I indirectly use your product. I surf reddit via teddit, libreddit and both of the. have integrated reveddit into their codebase. If a comment is removed by reddit mods/admins, on libreddit you get a small notice which then directly links the notice to reveddit site from which I can see what the deleted comment looked like.

Looks like libreddit links to another site whose differences I mentioned here [1]. See here for example [2]. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33478793 [2] https://libreddit.spike.codes/r/meirl/comments/ymj861/meirl/...

As I remember it, libreddit used to have reveddit integrated. They must have changed it or I might have confused it with teddit.

But, teddit right now does have reveddit integrated.

https://teddit.pussthecat.org/r/meirl/comments/ymj861/meirl/...

Also, is there no way to use Reveddit without turning of Enhanced Tracking Protection in firefox. Could the reddit tracker be proxied from reveddit's end so that firefox (tracker blocker) does not block the tracker.

Re: Show HN: Reveddit.com: Improving online discourse with transparent moderation

#42

Post by leetnewb »

dmix wrote: post #31
mariusor wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This subreddit has something like 1000+ moderators and they remove any comments that doesn't fit into Reddit's very narrowly defined overton window Or the subreddit has a very strict set of rules for posting top level comments which include: > 3. Non-professional personal anecdotes will be removed > 4. Criticism of published work should assume basic competence of the researchers and reviewers > 5. Comments dismissi…

Just curious, have you spent time looking at the type of comments getting removed? Have you looked at any of the top threads on Reveddit/Unddit with 75% of the comments gone? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see how it goes way, way beyond those rules you just listed, into something that can only be described as a petty dictatorship - but with any hundred angry nerds who happened to show up playing the dictator.…

I actually think the quality of the comment section in /r/science has gotten worse over the years because moderation is too slow or lenient. I assume that has more to do with the volume of work than intent of the moderation team themselves.

Re: Show HN: Reveddit.com: Improving online discourse with transparent moderation

#43

Post by adammarples »

andy_ppp wrote: post #39
fuckstick wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, but that’s not what the rule is saying (be civil, no ad hominem, etc). If that were the case I would have no issue. Maybe that would be a reasonable rule - and it is on many forums. It’s saying that criticism must “assume competence” - that’s very different - and as a moderator I can twist any kind of criticism into a violation of this rule. And why do I have to assume competence anyway - shouldn’t the work stand…

The community is 95% less competent than the researchers so I think this rule is fine.

That's why I go to the comments, for the 1% of commenter who do know better and can add something. That's why HN is still quite good, there are real experts here commenting on stuff below the line. Imagine if HN ruled that every article posted must be assumed correct - HN as a commentary would have no value for me any more.

Re: Show HN: Reveddit.com: Improving online discourse with transparent moderation

#45

Post by feet »

mariusor wrote: post #30
dmix wrote: post #3

I love reveddit.com, it's hilarious to look at the typical r/science post and see 60%+ of comments removed on average (the 'controversial' ones go 75%+). If the moderators agree with the study there is zero dissent tolerated. This subreddit has something like 1000+ moderators and they remove any comments that doesn't fit into Reddit's very narrowly defined overton window. Not just people being off-topic or taboo... b…

> This subreddit has something like 1000+ moderators and they remove any comments that doesn't fit into Reddit's very narrowly defined overton window Or the subreddit has a very strict set of rules for posting top level comments which include: > 3. Non-professional personal anecdotes will be removed > 4. Criticism of published work should assume basic competence of the researchers and reviewers > 5. Comments dismissi…

It makes me think about comment sections here on HN when a study on psychedelics gets posted. Suddenly 90% of top comments are all personal anecdote about mushrooms or whatever.

Re: Show HN: Reveddit.com: Improving online discourse with transparent moderation

#46

Post by mhuffman »

andy_ppp wrote: post #35
fuckstick wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Criticism of published work should assume basic competence What this is saying is that even if egregious blunders are made it is against the rules to call that out - how can I point out incompetence if I have to assume competence? I host a medical journal club - statistical incompetence in the life sciences is bountiful. > Comments dismissing established findings I’m sure defining established isn’t difficult to do/…

It’s better to say I think the authors should have thought about X rather the author is a moron and incompetent for not doing X. You can still say it by critiquing the actions not the character of the person. Similar rules exist in the Houses of parliament around accusations of lying simply because everyone would decend into that as a method of argument. It’s harder to call people out but still possible in my opinion…

>It’s better to say I think the authors should have thought about X rather the author is a moron and incompetent for not doing X.

It is probably less being a moron or incompetent than having an agenda would be the likely complaint ... depending on the subject matter that is. I suspect this is much more of a problem is social sciences than, say, pure mathematics.

Re: Show HN: Reveddit.com: Improving online discourse with transparent moderation

#47

Post by otikik »

dmix wrote: post #3

I love reveddit.com, it's hilarious to look at the typical r/science post and see 60%+ of comments removed on average (the 'controversial' ones go 75%+). If the moderators agree with the study there is zero dissent tolerated. This subreddit has something like 1000+ moderators and they remove any comments that doesn't fit into Reddit's very narrowly defined overton window. Not just people being off-topic or taboo... b…

My take: science has been politicized. As a result people feel like they are entitled to share their (often naive and inexperienced) opinion.

Problem is this: science is not democratic. Consensus plays a role, but not everyone getting to the point were you are equipped to peer review others often takes years of effort and study. That’s unavoidable, given that the easy questions have already been answered.

A single … “folkloric” comment is not problematic. When 60% or 75% of the comments are like that, the problem is that the subreddit isn’t science any more. It has become “wacky theory time”.

So at that time you have a choice: either you moderate, in order to keep the channel on-topic, or you accept everything, at which point the guys who benefit from science not being available to the general public have won.

Of course this moderation process isn’t going to be perfect and there will be false positives.

I have been on the receiving end of a campaign organized by a somewhat popular forum in order to fill up a direct democracy platform with as many memes and random shit as possible. The worst night I just had to hide everything that was posted, the signal to noise was too high. This meant that some legitimate proposals where lost. It wasn’t a perfect solution either, but it was the only one we had.

From my experience, I think without moderation r/science would become “aliens built the pyramids” in a week.

Re: Show HN: Reveddit.com: Improving online discourse with transparent moderation

#48

Post by GameOfFrowns »

mariusor wrote: post #33
dmix wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just curious, have you spent time looking at the type of comments getting removed? Have you looked at any of the top threads on Reveddit/Unddit with 75% of the comments gone? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see how it goes way, way beyond those rules you just listed, into something that can only be described as a petty dictatorship - but with any hundred angry nerds who happened to show up playing the dictator.…

You call it petty dictatorship, I call it the best moderated subreddit of the whole platform.

Until the day you fail the purity test and have your IP and all accounts permabanned due to a disagreement with a mod in disguise.

Re: Show HN: Reveddit.com: Improving online discourse with transparent moderation

#49

Post by pontsun »

GameOfFrowns wrote: post #48
mariusor wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You call it petty dictatorship, I call it the best moderated subreddit of the whole platform.

Until the day you fail the purity test and have your IP and all accounts permabanned due to a disagreement with a mod in disguise.

Luckily, moderators can't IP ban anyone. :)

Re: Show HN: Reveddit.com: Improving online discourse with transparent moderation

#50

Post by rhaksw »

i67vw3 wrote: post #41
rhaksw wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looks like libreddit links to another site whose differences I mentioned here [1]. See here for example [2]. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33478793 [2] https://libreddit.spike.codes/r/meirl/comments/ymj861/meirl/...

As I remember it, libreddit used to have reveddit integrated. They must have changed it or I might have confused it with teddit. But, teddit right now does have reveddit integrated. https://teddit.pussthecat.org/r/meirl/comments/ymj861/meirl/... Also, is there no way to use Reveddit without turning of Enhanced Tracking Protection in firefox. Could the reddit tracker be proxied from reveddit's end so that firefox (tra…

> teddit right now does have reveddit integrated.

Oh I see, they link it from the [deleted] author name instead of the [removed] content. That's an odd choice.

> Could the reddit tracker be proxied from reveddit's end

teddit and libreddit may themselves be trackers! I don't see how proxying empowers users. You don't need to be a huge company to be a tracker, and that's the problem I have with this arbitrary disconnect.me list which I mentioned in another comment [1]. It's picking and choosing who you should trust, and that is a dubious security strategy.

We should be building systems that are trustworthy, not relying on lists of domains. Inevitably, such lists are flawed. They are arguably rotten to the core because they're telling you to trust new domains that won't appear on their list (such as your pussthecat.org link) and not to trust anyone they mark as "evil". I don't think any social media site or proxy site deserves blind trust. Caveat emptor.

Plus, if I set up such a proxy I'd just end up hitting Reddit's API limits because requests would then go out from fewer sources. By allowing clients to make the requests, it's the same as users opening the app or website.

I guess these other sites you mention don't get much traffic, otherwise they would be hitting those rate limits. Reveddit also makes more requests than them because they, like Reddit, do not show where auto-removed comments appear. For example, this comment [2] should have a reply. Reveddit can show it [3]. Even if the author and content were not filled in from the user page, Reveddit would still show a marker for that removed comment.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33478410

[2] https://teddit.pussthecat.org/r/interestingasfuck/comments/w...

[3] https://www.reveddit.com/v/interestingasfuck/comments/wenhq7...

Post reply on HN