Live data from Hacker News

Shame Storm

firstthings.com

181–190 of 247 posts

Re: Shame Storm

#181
This article, if written by someone else, might be more impactful for me. This is the story of a woman who fled half-way across the world from a Twitter-storm, but who, when confronted by a refugee who had been shot and tortured in his home country, that his suffering did not mean he had the right to seek asylum. This is a woman who admires Marine Le Pen and Trump, but is happy to seek her own asylum when a minor shit-storm goes down.

But to address the articles concern - the reason we all seek mob justice is because a) it works, and it hurts, and it can ruin the lives of even the richest of us and b) we have no other buttons left. We mash the twitter/facebook/HN button because it is the last place we have any agency. Corporate interests have taken over out politics, rendering even the power of the ballot box moot since most parties appear to be in someone's pockets, the power of our consumption is dulled by decades of moribund growth, our ability to protest curtailed by an ever-present state of surveillance. This is what we have and, by god, we will keep mashing those buttons until things change.

Re: Shame Storm

#182
post #117

The issue is also that people got more and more sensitive over ybrast decades. Political correctness seems to be at a all time high. Try to say openly in the bay area that you support Trump and you will be shamed like never before. Shaming is now always in our mind and I find myself thinking more and more about redacting what I say to make it "unshameful" in order to avoid any possibility of shaming.

I don't think that's the same thing. It does point to a basic intellectual failing of the modern right, though... conflating being judged with being censored. Nobody's taking away your right to free speech. We just reserve the right to think you're an asshole for saying it.

When it comes time for decision making, everyone wants to be heard, and everyone wants their opinions considered. Treating/dismissing someone as an asshole doesn't facilitate any sort of basis for discussion, debate, agreement, compromise. Then, when the ignored and dismissed get so fed up that they are boisterous and riotous, and their opponents still don't acknowledge or address their voice...what is next?

Answer: Violence

Re: Shame Storm

#183

The issue is also that people got more and more sensitive over ybrast decades. Political correctness seems to be at a all time high. Try to say openly in the bay area that you support Trump and you will be shamed like never before. Shaming is now always in our mind and I find myself thinking more and more about redacting what I say to make it "unshameful" in order to avoid any possibility of shaming.

> Try to say openly in the bay area that you support Trump and you will be shamed like never before. Try being a 12 year old, in the south, who is openly mocked and degraded by his father for having a friend of a different race. How's that for shaming. Try being a 16 year old, getting kicked out of your home and called a faggot for getting an ear piercing. Are we politically correct yet? There is a lot of hate in thi…

Self censorship != true acceptance of other people.

Re: Shame Storm

#184
post #47

As I've mentioned before, one of the interesting things I like to study in a casual way is the effect of social community structures on behavior. At this point it is not terribly controversial that modern social media systems encourage shame storms, via things like easy "viral" sharing, the existence of moderation systems that can be used to nuke any attempt to defend oneself out of existence, and the way modern soci…

It's weird to me that almost all posting/commenting platforms are about the same. You get a series of small boxes with text in them and a small box to type into, usually too small to fit more than a couple of sentences, perhaps a button to promote, a button to reshare, and that's it. Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Medium, Disqus... all the same. We've explored so little of the design space. If I had to hazard in extrapo…

The majority of these suggestions raise the level of effort to make (and display) posts and comments. As someone who currently rarely blogs or tweets, I'd prefer something that lowered the effort to make good posts. I freely admit that I have no obviously good ideas for that at the moment.

One of these suggestions, though:

> Even when reshared, your comment is always presented together with, and close to, the content of the original source article so it's hard to ignore the source.

...is interesting because the most prominent example of that workflow is Tumblr, which is widely expected to be near death. I like the idea in principle, but I notice that when I share an image or post from Tumblr with someone I am very likely to do it by sharing a screenshot, precisely to avoid having the bit I'm calling attention to overshadowed by its context...

Re: Shame Storm

#185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's weird to me that almost all posting/commenting platforms are about the same. You get a series of small boxes with text in them and a small box to type into, usually too small to fit more than a couple of sentences, perhaps a button to promote, a button to reshare, and that's it. Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Medium, Disqus... all the same. We've explored so little of the design space. If I had to hazard in extrapo…

> We've explored so little of the design space. The design space that we are willing to explore is limited by the fundamental evolutionary drive of social media platforms to hold your attention as long as possible by feeding you little hits of dopamine for minimal effort. Social media platforms thrive on size and activity and neither can be established by raising the bar, only by lowering it to new depths.

I think (at least a few) people are starting to realize that this is what's happening. There may be a window of opportunity opening up to try new and different things. I suspect there are a fair number of folks who are looking for alternatives to Facebook/Twitter/etc. and would be intrigued by novelty.

Bumble is an example of a platform that was all about changing the rules of engagement, and it seems to be doing all right so far. Perhaps there's hope?

Re: Shame Storm

#186
For a more gracious treatment of the subject of public shame, try listening to Monica Lewinsky [0]

"[I was required to] listen to my sometimes catty, sometimes churlish, sometimes silly self being cruel, unforgiving, uncouth; listen, deeply, deeply ashamed, to the worst version of myself"

[0] https://www.ted.com/talks/monica_lewinsky_the_price_of_shame

Re: Shame Storm

#187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Try to say openly in the bay area that you support Trump and you will be shamed like never before. Try being a 12 year old, in the south, who is openly mocked and degraded by his father for having a friend of a different race. How's that for shaming. Try being a 16 year old, getting kicked out of your home and called a faggot for getting an ear piercing. Are we politically correct yet? There is a lot of hate in thi…

Self censorship != true acceptance of other people.

Self acceptance leads to true acceptance of other people.

Re: Shame Storm

#188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's weird to me that almost all posting/commenting platforms are about the same. You get a series of small boxes with text in them and a small box to type into, usually too small to fit more than a couple of sentences, perhaps a button to promote, a button to reshare, and that's it. Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Medium, Disqus... all the same. We've explored so little of the design space. If I had to hazard in extrapo…

> You must listen to your comment read back to you aloud before you can post it. https://www.mattcutts.com/blog/youtube-adds-read-comment-alo...

Ha! I think I thought of this independently from Randall Munroe, but who knows.

Anyway, we should do this experiment, and others! What's to lose?

Re: Shame Storm

#189
Also known as mob rule, one of the main reasons philosophers like Plato and Aristotle didn't like complete democracies.

Re: Shame Storm

#190
post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Dueling implies that someone who is _better at one thing_ (hurting others) is inherently Right I don't think it does. Revisit the story of Jeffrey Hudson, and how winning a duel changed his life. What it does imply is some personal risk in making unsubstantiated claims against people. Try looking at the glass as half-full. Under the present system, true claims are suppressed well enough by the pay-to-play nature of…

From all I know about past press, it was full of manufactured controversies. It also fuelled wars. The notion of journalistic objectivity was not even popular.

Never sold it as a panacea.

School us on the booming gossip and accusations industry in colonial America.

Post reply on HN