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

We’re receiving about 3,000 reports/hour

bsky.app

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 274 posts

Re: We’re receiving about 3,000 reports/hour

#211

Post by whaaaaat »

9x39 wrote: post #172
DrillShopper wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually no, to quote a modern poet under no circumstances do you "gotta hand it to them" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance Go back to debate class My tolerance is not performative and fuck you for strawmanning it

His point is that you're not tolerating anything in the sense of the verb. What have you tolerated?

You recognize there's a wide gulf between "things I disagree with and tolerate" and "things like hate speech that should not be tolerated under any circumstances" right?

Like, I strongly disagree with the Biden-style Democrat. I think they are nonsense garbage centrists with nothing worthwhile to say and weak spines. But I tolerate them coming in and saying things like, "We should means test food stamps!" I also tolerate the absurd notion that somehow, Biden-style Dems are "the far left". I think it's hilariously uneducated, but I tolerate it.

I do not tolerate people coming in with sexist, racist, homophobic, transphobic rhetoric. It's unacceptable. I will shut down, block, kick, ban or otherwise remove it without any questions.

Re: We’re receiving about 3,000 reports/hour

#212

Post by johneth »

idlewords wrote: post #95

Bluesky would really benefit from a notional ($1/year) signup fee. That small bit of friction makes a vast difference in knocking down all kinds of spam, at the price of being considered a bit uncool (for having a revenue stream).

I doubt it would change anything. One of the first things Elon did after taking control of Twitter was to make verification pay-to-play. Now the blue checkmark is basically a sign of either a bot, grifter, or engagement farmer.

Putting up a paywall hasn't deterred bots, and it won't work.

Re: We’re receiving about 3,000 reports/hour

#213

Post by kenmacd »

Funes- wrote: post #206
yapyap wrote: post #2

“ Excessive moderation is a barrier to open and robust debate, ultimately undermining the diversity of perspectives that make meaningful discourse possible. Supressing dissenting opinions will lead to an echo chamber effect. Would you like to join me an upcoming campaign to restore Europe? Deus vult!” ah social media, some people are truly as dumb as rocks

[flagged]

Adding a content warning to the account/post seems about right to me. Someone that creates an account just to immediately post something like this is very likely not following the community guidelines.

It's not like it was posted with any research, or as an opinion, or even on a thread on that topic. It's unlikely to have been posted with any altruistic intentions. It's much more likely to have been posted from a base of hate and with the intent to cause harm.

Heck, that you have an issue with this and think that it is 'extreme censorship' makes me much more likely to be suspect of your intention behind future posts here. That you frame this action as being 'banned' when the account wasn't actually banned only adds to that.

Re: We’re receiving about 3,000 reports/hour

#214

Post by aeioweu »

Funes- wrote: post #206
yapyap wrote: post #2

“ Excessive moderation is a barrier to open and robust debate, ultimately undermining the diversity of perspectives that make meaningful discourse possible. Supressing dissenting opinions will lead to an echo chamber effect. Would you like to join me an upcoming campaign to restore Europe? Deus vult!” ah social media, some people are truly as dumb as rocks

[flagged]

[flagged]

Re: We’re receiving about 3,000 reports/hour

#215

Post by Dweller1622 »

Teever wrote: post #200
Dweller1622 wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's trying to exclude "innocent" things like selfies or "simulated" things like drawings, but those are just as illegal in some or all countries. Selfies shared between teenagers are innocent! When an adult enters the picture is when it becomes a problem, because yes: it’s abuse and exploitation that we’re objecting to. Unless we think morality is a question of aesthetics, then yes, this also means drawings are no…

It's more nuanced than you think. How do you feel about 17 year olds collecting nudes of 14 year olds to gawk at and bully them over?

The supposition that this is “more nuanced than I think” given the particular example you’ve chosen strikes me as quite bizarre.

Does “17 year olds collecting nudes of 14 year olds to gawk at and bully them over” not strike you as abusive and/or exploitative? Because it certainly does to me.

I think you’ve chosen to interpret my post in an excessively literal manner (i.e only adults abuse or exploit teenagers) rather than the far more obvious alternatives I intended (e.g a 16 year old “sexting” their 17 year old partner).

Or, put another way, if I say we’re opposed to abuse and exploitation, and then you present me with a situation involving abuse and exploitation, of course I’d be opposed to it. Certainly you’re capable of figuring out this isn’t the sort of thing I was talking about.

Re: We’re receiving about 3,000 reports/hour

#216

Post by policky »

whaaaaat wrote: post #211
9x39 wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

His point is that you're not tolerating anything in the sense of the verb. What have you tolerated?

You recognize there's a wide gulf between "things I disagree with and tolerate" and "things like hate speech that should not be tolerated under any circumstances" right? Like, I strongly disagree with the Biden-style Democrat. I think they are nonsense garbage centrists with nothing worthwhile to say and weak spines. But I tolerate them coming in and saying things like, "We should means test food stamps!" I also tole…

[flagged]

Re: We’re receiving about 3,000 reports/hour

#218

Post by agoodusername63 »

PontifexMinimus wrote: post #109
agoodusername63 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It shares the same problem that Twitter had years ago back when it supported API blocklists. Everybody you're blocking is at the whims of the blocklist owner, and it didn't take long for those people to go insane and use their lists as a tool for their own personal unrelated crusades. Bluesky is already starting to experience this from a few I saw going around

Then unsubscribe from that blocklist.

Does that unblock whoever got blocked by the rogue blocklist?

Re: We’re receiving about 3,000 reports/hour

#219

Post by DrillShopper »

policky wrote: post #216
whaaaaat wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You recognize there's a wide gulf between "things I disagree with and tolerate" and "things like hate speech that should not be tolerated under any circumstances" right? Like, I strongly disagree with the Biden-style Democrat. I think they are nonsense garbage centrists with nothing worthwhile to say and weak spines. But I tolerate them coming in and saying things like, "We should means test food stamps!" I also tole…

[flagged]

This is kind of difficult to do in a vacuum; let's assume those are the only comments that these accounts have posted.

"sorry, but no to all of this: males cannot be lesbians" banned for transphobia for misgendering the second poster. Clear cut, get the fuck out if here.

No action for first and second poster.

Post reply on HN