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

Life after an internet mob attack

pasquale.cool

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 480 posts

Re: Life after an internet mob attack

#61

Post by jaywalk »

kokanator wrote: post #44
polote wrote: post #24

There are a lot of talks on HN about the toxicity of social media. And people are pretty angry against Google and Facebook. But to me the worse is by far Twitter. There are plenty of random people who have a disproportionate number of followers compared to the quality of their posts. And as a result can do these kind of mods. Which are amplified by retweets, something that barely exists in other social media. Random…

>Random people can have too much power. So the common persons voice should be rate limited? Only those 'qualified' should be able to have a larger impact? Who makes the rules in this situation?

> So the common persons voice should be rate limited? Only those 'qualified' should be able to have a larger impact?

Yes, to both. To go along with what the OP was saying, the common person should have to get the attention of someone with a "professional account" in order to get their voice amplified. Of course, that's assuming "professional accounts" actually mean something and aren't handed out like blue checkmarks on Twitter.

Re: Life after an internet mob attack

#63

Post by mordae »

kokanator wrote: post #44
polote wrote: post #24

There are a lot of talks on HN about the toxicity of social media. And people are pretty angry against Google and Facebook. But to me the worse is by far Twitter. There are plenty of random people who have a disproportionate number of followers compared to the quality of their posts. And as a result can do these kind of mods. Which are amplified by retweets, something that barely exists in other social media. Random…

>Random people can have too much power. So the common persons voice should be rate limited? Only those 'qualified' should be able to have a larger impact? Who makes the rules in this situation?

Mods. You say something nasty, you get banned. You make sense, you get slightly promoted.

Re: Life after an internet mob attack

#65

Post by throwkeep »

BitwiseFool wrote: post #25

The most disturbing and insidious sentiment of online mobs is claiming that the targets are "just being held accountable". Or that such people are just experiencing "consequences". I really can't express just how cold and bloodthirsty such statements seem to be. It's the perfect combination of justifying vicious behavior while also absolving themselves of responsibility.

Well said. And notice how the refrain changed. For years it was complete denial with "cancel culture doesn't exist". Now the response is, "it's just consequence culture".

Re: Life after an internet mob attack

#66

Post by 1123581321 »

lloydjones wrote: post #32
cousin_it wrote: post #11

If/when any of my friends get attacked by the mob, I hope I'll have the courage to stand by them publicly. A good recent test was the doxing of Scott Alexander. I signed the open letter against it with my real name and was happily surprised to see the names of many people I know. We should have more of these small but visible acts of resistance that let like-minded people find you.

The post, and your comment, IMO wrongly frames this as courage .vs. cowardice in standing up for friends. However, that fails to take into account any context of the particular “cancellation”. eg, A situation with damning screenshots of lewd DMs are pretty ‘smoking gun’, and the barometer of “good friends would publicly support me” feels like an insane expectation when (in this hypothetical instance) the person did a…

That kind of scenario doesn’t seem relevant, given the kind of attacks this thread is about, but if shown a damning screenshot, I would hope that I would not not immediately disavow a friend before looking into it, and if the situation was indeed that bad, would still love my friend enough to help them rehabilitate and obtain forgiveness from the people they wronged. I believe it’s possible to temporarily withdraw good graces to that end without permanently disavowing someone.

Re: Life after an internet mob attack

#67

Post by almostgone »

When these attacks take on a racial or gender-focused hue, I think they end up having a terribly ironic effect: further isolating the group they sought to protect (e.g., POC, women, etc). That is, they win the battle, but lose the war. Each of these stories reinforces in my mind to not associate with those that are higher on the oppression totem pole. I know it is not their fault, and I feel bad for doing so, but the risk/reward simply does not make sense. It helps that I'm a loner anyway.

See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26612918 for the effect I'm speaking of. People will continue to distance themselves as (primarily American) society continues to be a flashpoint and Twitter a flashmob.

Re: Life after an internet mob attack

#68

Post by lloydjones »

cousin_it wrote: post #54
lloydjones wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The post, and your comment, IMO wrongly frames this as courage .vs. cowardice in standing up for friends. However, that fails to take into account any context of the particular “cancellation”. eg, A situation with damning screenshots of lewd DMs are pretty ‘smoking gun’, and the barometer of “good friends would publicly support me” feels like an insane expectation when (in this hypothetical instance) the person did a…

My view is more like "a true friend would help you hide a body", or the short story "Friends in San Rosario" by O.Henry. If I abandoned a friend to the mob due to "screenshots of lewd DMs", I'd have a hard time living with myself afterward.

That doesn’t feel like a worldview that would result in a fairer society or better personal conduct.

If defending a person, in the face of prima facie evidence, has the result of preserving their reputation and status (and keeping the reputation and status of the accuser in their original state) then it doesn’t feel useful or good.

Re: Life after an internet mob attack

#69

Post by UnpossibleJim »

BitwiseFool wrote: post #25

The most disturbing and insidious sentiment of online mobs is claiming that the targets are "just being held accountable". Or that such people are just experiencing "consequences". I really can't express just how cold and bloodthirsty such statements seem to be. It's the perfect combination of justifying vicious behavior while also absolving themselves of responsibility.

It shows that witch trials haven't gone away; they never really did. They just became more technologically savvy in their influence, both publicly and politically.

Re: Life after an internet mob attack

#70

Post by mordae »

shkkmo wrote: post #34
nathanaldensr wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is essentially why civilization has legal systems and courts. Unfortunately, legal systems and courts don't scale to internet (global) scale. You'll be "dead," metaphorically speaking, of an internet mob attack before your lawyer even calls you back.

We drastically need significant reform of our court system. We simply don't have the capacity to address the current demanda on the court system (which is why we need ao many plea deals.) We certainly don't have the slack we need in the system to be able to drastically expand the scope.

Nah, we just need some real mods on social media. We have them literally everywhere else.
Post reply on HN