71–80 of 205 posts
This is not a shadow ban. A shadow ban is when it appears to you that you are not banned, but from others perspective you are.
I think being banned from search could be part of a shadow ban, but when the entire service is search that's just a ban.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think being banned from search could be part of a shadow ban, but when the entire service is search that's just a ban.
If it was a shadow ban he would see his site when he searched but we wouldn't. This is definitely not that.
Only because this is a search engine do I say this solidly isn't a shadow ban.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there also a term for being algorithmically suppressed on a social media platform, I wonder? I.e. a much more subtle, harder to dectect mechanism whereby the algorithms ensure you get some exposure, but never the same as other unsuppressed people would get based on similar activity. Or only exposure to a certain limited subset of the graph based on some metrics (e.g. just your 'friends' so no one points out you ar…
Yes, its called Algorithmic Supression. That doesn't sound as cool and victimey though.
This is not a shadow ban. A shadow ban is when it appears to you that you are not banned, but from others perspective you are.
Yes. Unfortunately people increasingly use "shadow ban" to just mean "ban", perhaps it sounds cool?
Imo a logical interpretation of "shadow ban" would be when you are banned but they didn't tell you they banned you, and regular "ban" is when they tell you you were banned. It makes enough sense that people don't think they need to look it up to confirm.
edit: funny enough, I did double-check the wikipedia page to make sure my understanding was correct, but upon reading further it does acknowledge the expanding of the definition: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadow_banning
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A bunch of sites popped up hosting it loaded with SEO garbage and ads. I’d licensed it MIT so while they certainly can, it sure doesn’t feel nice.
I've writing and freely shared a lot of OSS code and I plan to continue doing that. All MIT licensed. But I keep thinking that this is a limitation of MIT. It's written with the purest of good intentions but without any way to prevent bad actors from exploiting that. I wonder if there's a better kind of license that provides a close level of freedom but would prevent some of the most obvious exploitations (e.g. packa…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can find Beej.us with DDG, but not daverupert.com. Maybe Beej got the problem resolved somehow.
He says in the link it’s specifically the C guide, the rest of the website is fine. Though... yeah, DDG queries like “beej c guide strlen” give reasonable results for me, if with an unjustifiably high-ranked position for the mirror at http://docs.hfbk.net/beej.us . Bing ones only include the mirror and the other guides (and a Scribd-hosted PDF copy, of all things, as the first result below a huge navigation card refe…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Elon wants to redefine the term as well but for the purpose of a coordinated witch hunt. People like using shadow ban because it sounds more malicious vs. content that is no longer actively promoted by a company. It's hard to claim you're a victim if the reason is you're just not that interesting or popular.
There is difference between "content that is no longer actively promoted by a company" and "the company explicitly put your content on a no-show list". Sure, it's not shadow banning but "just" stealth banning (as you're still not informed that you got banned, or reason for it), but banning nonetheless