Exciting news. One thing I sincerely hope reddit will do with the new injection is to increase the level of quality of content and discussion across the board. Often the advice given is "you've got to find the smaller subreddits" and while that's true, I think having the first few layers filled with terrible content and hive-minded, often racist/sexist discussion is incredibly detrimental to both the site's image and…
The recent update of the default subreddits was nice, until it just decreased the level of discourse in those previously excellent subreddits.
51–60 of 433 posts
Re: Reddit
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
HN has downvoting. I was able to downvote you, and your comment went lower on the page and turned grey. HN also has excellent moderation.
I believe he's referring to stories, not comments, as he explicitly refers to material on the front page. I don't know if there's a karma threshold after which one can downvote stories. If there is, I haven't hit it, at 2129 karma as of this writing.
Re: Reddit
#53Reddit, like all community new sites, is awful and devolves to the mean of society as the user base grows.
Re: Reddit
#54How do you prevent extrinsic motivation from undermining intrinsic motivation here?
Re: Reddit
#55Does anyone know of any precedent for granting equity to a community site's users? I'm curious to see what sort of dynamic this creates in the site.
Re: Reddit
#56Exciting news. One thing I sincerely hope reddit will do with the new injection is to increase the level of quality of content and discussion across the board. Often the advice given is "you've got to find the smaller subreddits" and while that's true, I think having the first few layers filled with terrible content and hive-minded, often racist/sexist discussion is incredibly detrimental to both the site's image and…
Do we have any examples of large Internet communities with unilateral good discussion?
They way I've thought about it, the subreddits with better user content/discussion are primarily because:
* They attract fewer people, so only users more dedicated to the topic and more dedicated to finding a good community will find them. These users tend to be better contributors.
* Heavy-handed authoritarian moderation.
The first one only works so long as the subreddit is less popular. The more it will regress toward the mean of Internet contributions, which I believe to be inherently low.
The second one only works well when you have a specific topic with carefully defined rules and very active moderators with no regard for popular consensus and said moderators don't develop a power complex.
I don't think reddit has shown any interesting solutions to the problem of high quality contribution. At the risk of sounding elitist, we've seen how popularity kills quality discussion on countless communities over the years. Again, I think massive discussion tends toward being inherently low on average.
Edit: Beaten by noir_lord by a couple minutes listing the exact same two points.
Re: Reddit
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree with you, but... > no administrator transparency, admin transparency can lead to vociferous site-wide meta nonsense and it can also get toxic very quickly.
However, the lack of transparency can lead to baseless speculation, which can be just as toxic, if not worse . Case in point, during The Fappening, a large number were filled with conspiracy theories on why the administrators hadn't banned it yet before Wong's blog post, which was only made a week after the first incident.
Although, as of recently the reddit administrators started banning some of the more racist subreddits even though they didn't have any official change in policy.
Re: Reddit
#58Yishan Wong has a big vision for what reddit can be. I’m excited to watch it play out. Wow, seriously? He's talking about the guy who spewed this nonsense[0]: We understand the harm that misusing our site does to the victims of this theft, and we deeply sympathize. Having said that, we are unlikely to make changes to our existing site content policies in response to this specific event. The reason is because we consi…
I'm confused, sorry. Are you for or against the banning?
I'd love to get some feedback from the downvoters, because it's hard for me to reconcile Yishan Wong's statement with Sam's assertion that he's "excited to watch it play out".
Re: Reddit
#59Reddit as a platform peaked in 2013- quantitatively[1] and qualitatively. It's mainstream now, and will soon be passe (something like SomethingAwful).
If reddit has any value as an investment, it's for advertising and personal (pseudonymous or not) data. Facebook peaked a few years ago in the way I've described, and since their IPO has grown in market value[2] but declined in cultural value[3] (even as its MAU continue to grow!). They are slowly selling off piece by piece, literally to the highest bidder, the equity, trust and attention that it has built up over the years. It's not a sustainable model, it's in a mature phase by now, and it generates a whole lot of cash while it lasts.
Wouldn't be surprised to watch reddit do the same.
[1] http://www.randalolson.com/2014/09/28/the-most-upvoted-post-... [2] http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=FB&t=2y&l=on&z=l&q=l&c= [3] https://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=facebook
Re: Reddit
#60But yeah, seeing the phrase "First, it’s always bothered me that users ..." not end in a discussion of the toxic parts of Reddit's culture and the various high-profile cases of Reddit's admins ignoring ongoing problems of their most horrifying sub-reddits... that was a bit jarring.