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

Trouble at the Koolaid Point

seriouspony.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 285 posts

Re: Trouble at the Koolaid Point

#121

Post by adaml_623 »

DanielBMarkham wrote: post #112
merrua wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://www.ece.umd.edu/News/news_story.php?id=1788 http://www.enre.umd.edu/content/rmeyer-assessing.pdf http://nms.sagepub.com/content/early/2012/09/12/146144481245... (if you have login)

No doubt there's all kinds of interesting statistics in here. I'd be interested in finding data about the age of the people harassing others. I doubt you'd see many 40-year-olds. It's really crazy that we give adolescents all this latitude growing up -- they can't be tried as adults, their medical care is the responsibility of others, they are provided free food and medical care if needed, etc. -- and then we expect…

Anecdotal counter example: Google 'sweepyface' and you'll find the sad story of what I would describe as a conspiracy theorist who tweeted thousands of times regarding the Madeleine McCann (missing child) case. The technical question of whether she was trolling and harassing people or merely tweeting her views repetitively is up for debate but she was 63.

Obsession and outrage comes from all types.

Re: Trouble at the Koolaid Point

#122

Post by adaml_623 »

tomp wrote: post #69
scribu wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there are several points: 1. Most people starting out online are not aware that "Your chances of being harassed increases linearly as your popularity." and most people that haven't been abused online themselves don't think it's a serious problem. 2. The ratio of harassment to popularity is not a universal constant; it can be improved. 3. By shedding light on the issue, there is at least a hope that the situat…

> By shedding light on the issue, there is at least a hope that the situation can be improved. If nobody talks about this, then there's no way things can get better. On the contrary, silence would probably make things worse, as trolls would learn that they can get away with it. Are you sure about that? It's not like if you tell a thief that stealing is bad, they won't steal any more. Also, a counter point would be, t…

Stories where online harassment ends up in prison sentences probably deters some people.

Re: Trouble at the Koolaid Point

#123

Post by GFK_of_xmaspast »

Niten wrote: post #67
jmduke wrote: post #3

This is an excellent, brave thing to write and I originally had a long comment highlighting a bunch of particularly poignant paragraphs that I deleted because really you should just read the entire thing. Neither I nor the vast majority of the people I know have ever been subject to online harassment and it makes me thankful that there are incredible people like Kathy out there. Lord knows I wouldn't have the courage…

I wouldn't call MetaFilter a particularly high quality community. Discussions there can have just as many trite and trollish comments as your average subreddit. How MetaFilter differs is in that it features a rigid, hierarchical moderation structure, with gatekeepers who ensure posted content meets the stringent politically-correct tastes of its leadership. As a result I have seen legitimately interesting, good-faith…

No-one who uses "politically correct" unironically is going to have opinions worth listening to.

Re: Trouble at the Koolaid Point

#124

Post by zyx321 »

arrrg wrote: post #114
Niten wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't call MetaFilter a particularly high quality community. Discussions there can have just as many trite and trollish comments as your average subreddit. How MetaFilter differs is in that it features a rigid, hierarchical moderation structure, with gatekeepers who ensure posted content meets the stringent politically-correct tastes of its leadership. As a result I have seen legitimately interesting, good-faith…

Yeah, this sexist trash was removed. Thankfully. I’m happy the MetaFilter will not give misogynists like yourself a place to be. And that’s perfectly alright. Keeping awful people out is the right of any community.

Can we please keep this us vs them bullshit off HN? The linked blog, whether you agree with it or not, keeps a reasonably neutral tone throughout (even if the author's frustration is obvious).

Agreeing with it does not automatically make someone a misogynist, and criticizing a moderator does not automatically make someone an awful person.

Re: Trouble at the Koolaid Point

#125

Post by iSnow »

verroq wrote: post #98
iSnow wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>historically that has only served to push users to other services. But this is exactly what you want - get rid of the low-quality users and offload them somewhere else. reddit has gotten itself quite a questionable image tolerating pornographic jailbait, necrophiliac porn, stolen nudes and domestic abusers on its platform for very long.

And who is to say these users are inherently low quality? Enjoying any anything socially unacceptable doesn't preclude them from creating content you may enjoy in another subreddit.

I'd argue that personality traits cluster, so that someone who frequents a fappenings-subreddit is way more likely to doxx your users, troll or cause other disturbances than people who don't.

And of course, junk traffic breeds more junk traffic. Even if the first generation of a shady subreddit might make this up with quality in other parts of your site, it will invariably attract generation 2 and later which will create a mini-eternal September.

Re: Trouble at the Koolaid Point

#126

Post by arrrg »

zyx321 wrote: post #124
arrrg wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, this sexist trash was removed. Thankfully. I’m happy the MetaFilter will not give misogynists like yourself a place to be. And that’s perfectly alright. Keeping awful people out is the right of any community.

Can we please keep this us vs them bullshit off HN? The linked blog, whether you agree with it or not, keeps a reasonably neutral tone throughout (even if the author's frustration is obvious). Agreeing with it does not automatically make someone a misogynist, and criticizing a moderator does not automatically make someone an awful person.

Tone is no excuse and if you agree with awful stuff, well that’s on you. Communities wanting to keep such people out is an awesome policy.

Re: Trouble at the Koolaid Point

#127

Post by DanBC »

tomp wrote: post #111
DanBC wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The leaked nudes are still available, even if not on reddit. That's the point - I can dump uuencoded blobs of text in HN that are stolen nudes. I'd be downvoted to hellban if I tried. Online communities create their own standards. Reddit's standards exclude some groups of people. That's a weird choice to make - in the name of freedom of expression we're going to create an environment that is ridiculously hostile to…

> That's a weird choice to make - in the name of freedom of expression we're going to create an environment that is ridiculously hostile to large numbers of people to make sure they can't express their opinions. So you're suggestion that instead, in the name of safety, we should create an environment that is ridiculously hostile to large numbers of people (banning them) to make sure they can't express their opinions?

> So you're suggestion that instead, in the name of safety, we should create an environment that is ridiculously hostile to large numbers of people (banning them) to make sure they can't express their opinions?

If their opinion is "You should die you stupid fucking cunt" or "I'm going to find you and rape you and then kill you" then yes, ban those people.

"I'd do a lot worse than rape you. I've just got out of prison and would happily do more time to see you berried [sic]. #10feetunder."

"I will find you, and you don't want to know what I will do when I do. You're pathetic. Kill yourself. Before I do. #Godie."

I find it fucking baffling that you chose to defend those people, the people saying stuff like that, at the cost of their victims.

Caroline Criado Perez was not complaining about one or two people sending a few dozens of messages that were a bit mean. She was inundated with thousands of messages, from many people, threatening sexual violence and death. One man was sending 50 messages per hour, over about 12 hours. Another woman sent hundreds of messages. Perez's "crime"? She campaigned to have a woman on British banknotes after the Bank of England phased out Elizabeth Fry on the £5 - leaving no women on the banknotes.

I would be proud to ban those people from any service I ran.

Re: Trouble at the Koolaid Point

#128

Post by RankingMember »

makomk wrote: post #94
jmduke wrote: post #3

This is an excellent, brave thing to write and I originally had a long comment highlighting a bunch of particularly poignant paragraphs that I deleted because really you should just read the entire thing. Neither I nor the vast majority of the people I know have ever been subject to online harassment and it makes me thankful that there are incredible people like Kathy out there. Lord knows I wouldn't have the courage…

From what I've seen, incredibly stringent moderation creates the illusion of a high-quality community more than anything else. For example, a while ago Something Awful forum member's boyfriend posted something claiming that she'd been raped by another forum member, and the admin at the time decided to handle it by permanently banning everyone involved including the alleged victim. You wouldn't have seen any criticism…

There was a moderator who turned out to be a convicted child molester (Aatrek), and it seems they knew prior, but didn't actually take action to remove him until it became general knowledge among forum members.

Re: Trouble at the Koolaid Point

#129

Post by tempodox »

GFK_of_xmaspast wrote: post #123
Niten wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't call MetaFilter a particularly high quality community. Discussions there can have just as many trite and trollish comments as your average subreddit. How MetaFilter differs is in that it features a rigid, hierarchical moderation structure, with gatekeepers who ensure posted content meets the stringent politically-correct tastes of its leadership. As a result I have seen legitimately interesting, good-faith…

No-one who uses "politically correct" unironically is going to have opinions worth listening to.

I suspect this opinion is neither popular nor politically correct, but I tend to agree.

Re: Trouble at the Koolaid Point

#130

Post by rwallace »

fleitz wrote: post #92

He went to jail for something he shouldn't have because he didn't go to jail for something he should have. That's karma for ya.

I'd like to believe that. It would certainly be nice if it were true.

Unfortunately it's not. Weev went to jail for reasons that had nothing to do with the bad things he did. And I think this is worth pointing out, because unjust laws are not selective like karma; if we tolerate them when they target assholes, it's not long before they start targeting innocent people.

Post reply on HN