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

The Frustration Loop

herman.bearblog.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–158 of 158 posts

Re: The Frustration Loop

#151

Post by robertlagrant »

pxoe wrote: post #149
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's what I mean by different levels of shadowbanning. "Well, the algorithm just isn't promoting you, that's not the same thing." The algorithm is sorting a feed containing millions of posts. There is no mathematical difference between a penalty and the removal of a bonus that similarly situated accounts get. They both cause your posts to be not seen by people who would otherwise have seen it. You can easily be blo…

how is something that _isn't_ shadowbanning, somehow a "level" of "shadowbanning"? no, a platform not promoting posts, and a platform hiding posts and making them not visible to anyone else at all, are not the same thing. see, it's going as far with complaints about "shadowbanning" as to say "well maaaybe 5% might see it - But it's still a shadowban!" - that's the part that makes the complaints sound like bullshit th…

> see, it's going as far with complaints about "shadowbanning" as to say "well maaaybe 5% might see it - But it's still a shadowban!" - that's the part that makes the complaints sound like bullshit that they are

I've no dog in this fight, but this seems deliberately obtuse. You could call "traditional" shadowbanning "100% shadowbanning" and what you've just described "95% shadowbanning". They're extremely close.

Re: The Frustration Loop

#152

Post by muppetman »

Nevermark wrote: post #76

I came up with a simple way to eliminate spam in my email, without any third party filtering. I have my own domain name for email. My email box accepts anything that goes the domain. I.e. a catchall email account. However, I give a different email address to every site and service. I.e. sitea@mydomain.com, site2@mydomain.com This lets my email reliably get auto sorted by who its from. But I also use a consistent form…

I just installed rspamd and don't have to do any of that faffing around.

It's better than Gmail in filtering Spam.

Re: The Frustration Loop

#153

Post by TeMPOraL »

Thorrez wrote: post #145
TeMPOraL wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It isn't. When you're banned, you know you're banned. Thus, you know you can't expect to use your account for communication anymore. When you're shadow-banned, you don't know you are shadow-banned, and will continue to attempt using your account for communication, and believe it's the other people who are just ignoring you.

What type of shadow ban are you talking about? Are you talking about being unable to post (e.g. The Frustration Loop) or about other people being unable to see your posts? Then yes, I agree that's worse than being banned. But if we're talking about a 10-60s lag (as I mentioned in my comment and the previous posters were talking about), I say that's better than being banned, because communication can still take place.

Right, my mistake. I was talking about both shadow-bans and error-bans/The Frustration Loop. The common thing here is that you're being gaslighted by the service.

Re: The Frustration Loop

#154

Post by TeMPOraL »

thimkerbell wrote: post #129
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Twitter has been doing things worse than that for years. They seem to even have different levels of shadow banning. The practice is fundamentally malicious because innocent people get caught in it all the time. The two main problems both stem from the fact that they don't admit to doing it. The first is that you're posting interesting things but nobody ever sees it because you're shadow banned, and then what you shou…

The Twitter shadowbanning that I saw was that if I was one of 10 people who replied to a tweet, someone using another account would not see my reply among them.

And of course with the way the service functions, plus the bloated UI, for the first couple hours they keep the plausible deniability of "eventual consistency".

Re: The Frustration Loop

#155

Post by tornato7 »

agent327 wrote: post #135

Instagram has a frustration loop. I know that, because it is triggered on my account: for every action I take, no matter how minor, it makes me log in again. Every link I click, everything I do, I get to make a detour through the login screen. It started with "suspicious activity detected on your account", followed by "your account has been disabled", and while it won't state the actual reason for this, the only real…

Sounds like they have identified you as a crawler / scraper and don't want another Cambridge analytics incident.

Re: The Frustration Loop

#157

Post by barryrandall »

throwaway14356 wrote: post #22

Akismet has no working appeal mechanism. What seems like 1000 years ago I got banned by it for posting comments on my own blog. (haha!) If I comment any place using it my comment are silently filtered out. I got banned by disquss too! for posting many useful links in comments on blogs by people I know. They resolved the issue in 2 days and were wonderfully polite about it. Akismet should at least clear wordpress user…

What I usually do for situations like this is give up on the site altogether. It takes me one click to add a domain to my uBlock list and search Google for the title. No appeals process will ever be that easy or reliable.

Re: The Frustration Loop

#158

Post by agent327 »

tornato7 wrote: post #155
agent327 wrote: post #135

Instagram has a frustration loop. I know that, because it is triggered on my account: for every action I take, no matter how minor, it makes me log in again. Every link I click, everything I do, I get to make a detour through the login screen. It started with "suspicious activity detected on your account", followed by "your account has been disabled", and while it won't state the actual reason for this, the only real…

Sounds like they have identified you as a crawler / scraper and don't want another Cambridge analytics incident.

Could be, but I'm an extremely minimal user. Surely volume counts for such a thing? I check the site once or twice a week, and look at some holiday pics of friends for a few minutes, for crying out loud...
Post reply on HN