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

Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

791–800 of 975 posts

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#791

Post by elgertam »

dang wrote: post #306
bambax wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're confusing bad actors with bad behavior . Bad behavior is something good people do from time to time because they get really worked up about a specific topic or two. Bad actors are people who act bad all the time. There may be some of those but they're not the majority by far (and yes, sometimes normal people turn into bad actors because they get upset about a given thing that they can't talk about anything els…

I think that's right. One benefit this has: if you can make the moderation about behavior (I prefer the word effects [1]) rather than about the person, then you have a chance to persuade them to behave differently. Some people, maybe even most, adjust their behavior in response to feedback. Over time, this can compound into community-level effects (culture etc.) - that's the hope, anyhow. I think I've seen such chang…

> I try to use depersonalized language for this reason. Instead of saying "you" did this (yeah that's right, YOU), I'll tell someone that their account is doing something, or that their comment is a certain way. This creates distance between their account or their comment and them, which leaves them freer to be receptive and to change.

I use this tactic with my kids when they do something wrong. Occasionally I slip up and really lay into them, but almost all of the time these days I tell them that I love them, I think they are capable of doing the right thing, but I didn't love some action they did or didn't do and I explain why. They may not be happy with this always, or with the natural (& parent-imposed) consequences of their actions, but it reinforces that they have a choice to do good in the future even if they slip up from time to time. If all of us were immutably identified by the worst thing we ever did, no one would have any incentive to change.

Thanks for the thoughtful & insightful comment, dang.

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#792

Post by haberman »

pstuart wrote: post #787
haberman wrote: post #781

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tens of thousands of emails recovered from the laptop turned out to be authentic, including the emails that formed the basis of the NYPost story.

My original comment in this thread never contested that. There's worthy conjecture of the provenance of same, but that's a different discussion. What was found to be true was that Hunter Biden was open to profiting from his association with his father (among other distasteful things). What has not been found to be true (read the report and tell me otherwise), and that is that Joe Biden himself was corrupt and sold fa…

Yes I am against corruption regardless of which party engages in it. Trump is as corrupt as they come, the only way he knows how to run anything is like a mob boss who expects loyalty above all.

But we're commenting on a story about moderation of online forums, not corruption of politicians. I don't find the emails especially incriminating, and I honestly find Joe Biden to be a pretty admirable person, not especially corrupt as politicians go. But I will never forget the way that the media and platforms like Twitter used their power to bury a story that turned out to be true. I believe they did so because it was inconvenient to their own personal biases and their investment in seeing Biden elected. I was invested in seeing Biden elected too! But our highest commitment must be to the truth. I have a deep distrust of people who would suppress true facts, especially when so many false or misleading narratives are circulated all the time.

As a great example of this, my comment that you replied to is currently rated at -1. It directly answers your question, it is not rude or impolite, and it is unquestionably true. And yet at least two people disliked it enough that they wanted to bury it. I don't know why those two people had that reaction, but that is exactly the behavior that I feel so distrustful of.

Contrast the Biden Laptop story with the Steele Dossier. That story was repeated endlessly in the media, with far more numerous and salacious accusations, which turned out to be almost totally discredited. Now I find Trump to be a repugnant figure, but the double standard here is infuriating to me. The truth should matter above all.

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#793

Post by baryphonic »

user3939382 wrote: post #493
dang wrote: post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't mean persuade them out of their opinions on $topic! I mean persuade them to express their opinions in a thoughtful, curious way that doesn't break the site guidelines - https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html .

Sufficiently controversial opinions are flagged, downvoted til dead/hidden, or associated users shadow banned. HN's policies and voting system, both de facto and de jure, discourage controversial opinions and reward popular, conformist opinions. That's not to pick on HN, since this is a common problem. Neither do I have a silver bullet solution, but the issue remains, and it's a huge issue. Evolution of norms, for be…

Almost completely disagree.

There are a few sacred cows here (I won't mention them by name, though the do exist), but I have earned my rep by posting mostly contrarian opinions, and I almost always have quite a few net upvotes - sometimes dozens. It's not too difficult: First, I cite facts that back up my claims from sources whose narratives would typically go against my argument. I cite the New York Times, Washington Post, the Atlantic, NPR, CNN, etc.; I only rarely cite Fox News, and never cite anything to the right of Fox. Second, I really internalize the rules about good faith, not attacking the weakest form of an argument, not cross-examining, etc. Sometimes I have a draft that has my emotions, and I'll edit it to make it more rational before posting. Third, I ask open-ended questions to allow myself to be wrong in the mind of other commenters. Instead of just asserting that some of my ultra-contrarian opinions are the only way anyone can see an issue, I may propose a question. By doing that, I have at times seen some excluded middle I hadn't considered, and my opinion becomes more nuanced. Fourth, I often will begin replying and then delete my reply because I know it won't add anything. This is the hardest one to do, but sometimes it's just the way you have to go. Some differences are merely tastes and preferences, and I'm not going to change the dominant tastes and preferences of the Valley on HN. I can only point out some of the consequences.

The content moderation rules and system here have encouraged me to write better and more clearly about my contrarian opinions, and have made me more persuasive. HN can be a crap-show at times, but in my experience, it's often some of the best commentary on the Internet.

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#794

Post by Spooky23 »

ufo wrote: post #586

In the US, where Twitter & Facebook are dominant, the current consensus in the public mind is that political polarization and radicalization are driven by the social media algorithms. However, I have always felt that this explanation was lacking. Here in Brazil we have many of the same problems but the dominant social media are Whatsapp group chats, which have no algorithms whatsoever (other than invisible spam filte…

It’s more nuanced than that. Social media has created watering holes for everything. Once communities of people who earnestly believe crazy shit.

If you believed in alien lizard people controlling the world or in 1980, your options to collaborate with fellow lunatics were limited.

Today, that’s a real thing with followers.

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#795

Post by foogazi »

dbrueck wrote: post #458

At least one missing element is that of reputation . I don't think it should work exactly like it does in the real world, but the absence of it seems to always lead to major problems. The cost of being a jerk online is too low - it's almost entirely free of any consequences. Put another way, not everyone deserves a megaphone. Not everyone deserves to chime in on any conversation they want. The promise of online discu…

> The cost of being a jerk online is too low - it's almost entirely free of any consequences.

Some people don’t care and have different value systems/goals - or the jerk behavior is valued by their community

Wonder if that is something the behavior can catch, ie prevent quote tweeting/ screenshot a particular person etc

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#796

Post by novon »

We're working on some solutions around this problem - a browser level filter on toxic comments / blatant misinformation found on ad-supported platforms, helpful context as a layer on top of content you're reading, and moderated community debate around current events, with enforced norms. Still early if anyone wants to join what's likely to be a non-profit:

https://brightgood.com

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#797

Post by etchalon »

rglover wrote: post #783
etchalon wrote: post #777

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are no successful "pay for access" social media networks, and the argument that Twitter's dominance some how held App.net back ignores all the other social networks that succeeded despite being founded after Twitter.

Yes. The reason a social network works is because of its brand, adoption, and network effects—not features (App.net sounds like a Boomer social network). Twitter is so well-established that introducing a premium paid version would be de-facto successful—if done properly, not like Twitter Blue—for producing revenue. Especially because so many people rely on it to communicate. A rough example: Twitter Basic = Free. Fol…

Social networks work because people enjoy using them. As people tell their friends about the network, they use it, and network effects allow it to grow. As it grows, its brand is established.

Twitter is a distant fourth or fifth place network because, as it is, most people do not enjoy using it. Its Brand is wildly seen as synonymous with toxic parts of our culture.

And your plan is to make it worse and then charge people to use it.

OK.

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#798

Post by BlueTemplar »

didericis wrote: post #766
anonyme-honteux wrote: post #747

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please write that article, I want to read it and I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one.

Thank you, I'll see if I can actually force myself to do it this time.

You might to want to look up at what happened when the "alt-right" Gab decided to start using the "liberal" Mastodon...

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#799

Post by paul7986 »

jonny_eh wrote: post #537
paul7986 wrote: post #470

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Internet needs to have a verified public identity / reputation system especially with deep fakes becoming more and more pervasive/easier to create. Trolls can troll all they want but if they want to be serious with their words then back it up with his or her online verified public Internet /reputation ID. If this is one of Musk's goals with Twitter he didn't overpay. The Internet definitely needs such a system..h…

Remember keybase.io? They still exist, but not as a cross-platform identity system anymore.

Yeah, but it never had Elon Musk backing it and or was an established app the likes of Twitter is.

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#800

Post by paul7986 »

pixl97 wrote: post #620
paul7986 wrote: post #470

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Internet needs to have a verified public identity / reputation system especially with deep fakes becoming more and more pervasive/easier to create. Trolls can troll all they want but if they want to be serious with their words then back it up with his or her online verified public Internet /reputation ID. If this is one of Musk's goals with Twitter he didn't overpay. The Internet definitely needs such a system..h…

How does this system work worldwide across multiple governments, is resistant to identity theft, and prevents things like dictatorships from knowing exactly who you are?

Would have to be an experiment first ... maybe in the US first.

Definitely might not be good for those in China and other similar places.

Post reply on HN