Reddit and the Struggle to Detoxify the Internet

Post by InitialLastName » Mon, Mar 12, 2018, 8:58 PM UTC

cookiecaper wrote: post #217

devinhelton wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"We really just need better public education" I agree 100% as long as you put me, or people of my worldview, in charge of the curriculum and personnel.

Yes. In today's age of near-universal literacy, "uneducated" is just a euphemism for views disliked by the the side in control of the education apparatus. While thought-policing media, schools, churches, and any other possible venue of "indoctrination" may "work" to a superficial extent, it mostly just completely destroys the credibility of your authority and leads to stunning implosion and destabilization. See: the…

Post by gowld » Mon, Mar 12, 2018, 9:00 PM UTC

prepend wrote: post #160

siegecraft wrote: post #148

This problem is easy to solve: give users the tools to do their own filtering. But services like to pretend that it's a hard problem because they don't want to actually cede that control to their users. The whole point of controlling the communication networks is to control what and how people say and hear.

It’s surprising how much social media bullshits on this issue. RSS had the standard and solution a decade ago. Being able to filter even by simple regex would be so much better than Facebook/Google’s “algorithm.” But it would allow us to filter out ads. It would also allow for community-driven white/black lists. But again, wouldn’t allow Coke and HBO to make you look at stuff.

Post by ddingus » Mon, Mar 12, 2018, 9:01 PM UTC

antishatter wrote: post #99

_m8fo wrote: post #46

So we've tried: - Real identities (Facebook comments) - Voting and self moderation (Reddit, HN, etc.) - Strong moderation (Reddit, HN) They all result in toxic comments, trolling, an echo chamber,or worse, a complete lack of participation. There's no real solution to this problem. However, if you create consequences or a cost to commenting you'd eliminate toxic comments and trolling at the cost of less participation…

I believe the somethingawful forums involve a cost to participate, something like a one time $10 fee that was designed to remove low content or negative content participators. Might be an interesting case study of your hypothesis.

Post by zaroth » Mon, Mar 12, 2018, 9:02 PM UTC

pjc50 wrote: post #253

zaroth wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you been following what’s going on in the UK with their anti-“hate” speech laws? Tweet something that someone decides is offensive to them, get a visit from the police? I’d say it’s a very rational concern that these regulations would be weaponized against “wrongthink”.

The number of actual prosecutions or even visits from the police is tiny, and when you look at the actual cases they tend to be racist death or rape threats.

Post by gowld » Mon, Mar 12, 2018, 9:03 PM UTC

frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #60

_m8fo wrote: post #46

So we've tried: - Real identities (Facebook comments) - Voting and self moderation (Reddit, HN, etc.) - Strong moderation (Reddit, HN) They all result in toxic comments, trolling, an echo chamber,or worse, a complete lack of participation. There's no real solution to this problem. However, if you create consequences or a cost to commenting you'd eliminate toxic comments and trolling at the cost of less participation…

I think your suggestion would lead to an echo chamber. Take a look at metafilter and how samey they've gotten. One thing to remember is that even small barriers implicity give mods much more power.