31–40 of 207 posts
Can Google just fucking kill this? Literally all my recruiter spam is coming from groups. Even when I worked at Google internally I raised a ticket with full info of what’s going on and they still haven’t fixed it. (Yes I have the “can’t add me to groups” button on).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> nobody gets kicked out by brownshirts for expressing their view. What about spam? Is the expectation that it's your obligation to filter it client-side?
If you see the spam it's already in your client, so yes. You don't see spam, if it was filtered upstream from you. The server admins try though. This latest Google assault kept people busy.
Spam is an expression of views.
[flagged]
> 2) There is no administrative ostracism. Nobody gets kicked out by brownshirts for expressing their view. To be clear, you are on record as equating content moderation on private platforms with Nazism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturmabteilung#:~:text=The%20S... .
[flagged]
Except it doesn't? One of the reasons usenet is dying is because without some sort of group-global moderation, everyone sees different things.. Newcomers see piles of spam, and when you don't get replies you are never sure is this something you said, or was your message silently filtered out.
It's like a forum where the moderators only ever use shadow-bans. Most people would hate such thing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> nobody gets kicked out by brownshirts for expressing their view. What about spam? Is the expectation that it's your obligation to filter it client-side?
If you see the spam it's already in your client, so yes. You don't see spam, if it was filtered upstream from you. The server admins try though. This latest Google assault kept people busy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 2) There is no administrative ostracism. Nobody gets kicked out by brownshirts for expressing their view. To be clear, you are on record as equating content moderation on private platforms with Nazism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturmabteilung#:~:text=The%20S... .
I think he's equating the different flavors of self professed socialists who get into a tizzy any time someone makes a joke online with Nazism. And also, I think it is deliberately hyperbolic so that only people with a sense of humor will refrain from getting in said predictable tizzy about it.
It also conveys low status.
Rules are made by higher status people in white shirts, but interpreted rigidly by lower status in brown/green/blue/...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you see the spam it's already in your client, so yes. You don't see spam, if it was filtered upstream from you. The server admins try though. This latest Google assault kept people busy.
How do you know that what was filtered was spam and not wrongthink ?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 2) There is no administrative ostracism. Nobody gets kicked out by brownshirts for expressing their view. To be clear, you are on record as equating content moderation on private platforms with Nazism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturmabteilung#:~:text=The%20S... .
I see; I was not aware that there is a specific connection between Nazis and the "brownshirt" term, though it is obviously a reference to some kind of uniform.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How much money is Google making from Usenet support?
It doesn't matter how much money USENET makes one company, what matters is what it represents. Surrendering USENET entirely to abuse means we're losing one of the last vestiges of the ARPANET. It brings great shame and dishonor that Google won't fight for it.
> we're losing
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I see; I was not aware that there is a specific connection between Nazis and the "brownshirt" term, though it is obviously a reference to some kind of uniform.
Too late, you're On The Record™. And this one goes into your permanent record, no getting out of this blunder.