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

A competitor crippled a $23.5M bootcamp by becoming a Reddit moderator

larslofgren.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

861–870 of 996 posts

Re: A competitor crippled a $23.5M bootcamp by becoming a Reddit moderator

#861

Post by johnnyanmac »

Workaccount2 wrote: post #850
johnnyanmac wrote: post #834

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's heavy moderation, and then there's enforcing propaganda. If you really want to look there during controversial issues, you'll see even long time posters get comments removed when it goes against whatever agenda they want to push. That's no longer a matter of trying to facilitate unpopular discussion.

But that's just reddit in general.

Sort of, but not to this degree. I think there's 4 levels of "control" a sub can have.

0. "Soft" power from votes, which determines what topics are de facto allowed to be talked about. Mods don't have as much influence here (hence why it's not really "#1"), but they can still influence it by removing certain comments. The psychology of down votes and how it affects communities has been studied for well over a decade so this isn't too crazy

1. "Petty mod abuse", which is probably what many comments remember reddit comments for. You make a tame comment, some lawful evil mod removes your comment, and any discussion over that ruling is met with mutes or bans. This is usually backed by "some" rule, so most of the time they have some point (no matter how stupid)

2. "Soft rules abuse", which is where "off-site" behavior kicks in. Where there's unlisted rules that are enforced, often from behavior not even directly performed in that community. It can also be personal grudges from some sort of supermod, which bans you from multiple subs they moderate over behavior in one of their subs.

3. Then there's "sentiment abuse", where people are moderated less for their behavior and more for whatever the mod feels like that day. Either to forge their own narrative, or from being paid off and following some external party's sentiment. These are almost never listed as rules because they are either too blatantly biased ("do not insult Google" on r/Google wouldn't work out well, even if it is run by Google employees), or simply because the rules change too frequently.

I'd say r/conservative is solidly in tier 3, and even there is a very extreme example. It was interesting seeing how the sub quickly changed on topics like the Epstien files based on whatever spin occurred IRL.

Re: A competitor crippled a $23.5M bootcamp by becoming a Reddit moderator

#862

Post by jacquesm »

WillPostForFood wrote: post #804
jacquesm wrote: post #691

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course man, everything is 'just fine'. Outside of the USA: talk of invading Canada, Greenland, indiscriminate execution of people on the high seas, a tariff war that seems to be a series of own goals, destabilization of NATO, the burning of 75 years of goodwill. Inside the USA: military in the cities, half the country is being depicted as 'the enemy' by those in power, an embarrassing cadre of incompetents are in…

Again you are speaking from ignorance, and the inability to differentiate online bubble talk, shit talking by politicians, and reality. The Candian PM was sitting in the White House laughing with the president two days ago, are you seriously saying there is some sort of invasion threat? I don't like that twitter shit talking has bled into people's actual mouths, but I am capable of understanding that it is just talk.…

> Again you are speaking from ignorance, and the inability to differentiate online bubble talk, shit talking by politicians, and reality. The Candian PM was sitting in the White House laughing with the president two days ago, are you seriously saying there is some sort of invasion threat? I don't like that twitter shit talking has bled into people's actual mouths, but I am capable of understanding that it is just talk.

The rest of the world - so outside of your bubble - hears that talk and is getting seriously worries. Not just about the leadership of the USA, but about the USA as a whole.

> George HW Bush deployed national guard to cities to deal with unrest,

But not on a pretext, though, arguably, he did start a major war on a pretext, so there's that.

> Lyndon Johnson deployed the national guard multiple times to deal with unrest, Eisenhower didn't just deploy the National Guard, he sent in the 101st Airborne - the real army. The current deployments are small and peaceful in comparison.

But they are on a pretext and that is what should worry you. The commander-in-chief has gone nuts to the point that he is inventing reasons to send the military into cities that do not want them.

But if you want to choose to ignore all that and pretend that everything is just a-ok, be my guest. We'll see how your comment ages.

Re: A competitor crippled a $23.5M bootcamp by becoming a Reddit moderator

#863

Post by jojobas »

jibal wrote: post #589

The discussion at https://larslofgren.com/codesmith-reddit-reputation-attack/ is not going well for Mr. Novati. Edit: oops, that was the wrong link! I meant to link to the reddit post discussing that article: https://www.reddit.com/r/codingbootcamp/comments/1o1guxj/tho... I think one of the most telling facts is that pro-Novati poster u/Ok-Donuts has posted numerous comments that are clearly a violation of all norms…

That'll show him!

Re: A competitor crippled a $23.5M bootcamp by becoming a Reddit moderator

#864

Post by Montymio »

kandel wrote: post #815
Montymio wrote: post #813

Earlier quoted context omitted.

or maybe you’re part of formation’s PR. The article lays out the reality.

Who are you? Your account is 13 hours old. Do you work with one of aggravated parties or are you a concerned bystander?

you sound just like michael.

Re: A competitor crippled a $23.5M bootcamp by becoming a Reddit moderator

#865

Post by Montymio »

michaelnovati wrote: post #361
Montymio wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

just gonna guess here. Were you “invited” because you had signed up with Codesmith under an alias and then received a standard event invite? because it doesn’t sound like anyone at Codesmith would be personally inviting you.

Yeah by Eric Kirsten via Email

show it

Re: A competitor crippled a $23.5M bootcamp by becoming a Reddit moderator

#866

Post by abustamam »

cestith wrote: post #847
alittlebee wrote: post #827

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a trans person, I find it interesting that so many people have opinions on an illness that truly sucks. It’s rough reading every day that you are “wrong” about something you suffer from. I wish folks could see the losses we experience when we transition. I think if they did, they might extend a little more grace and compassion. (That said, I do agree with you on nuance)

Nuance is not a popular thing in the US in recent decades. The false dichotomy appears to be more than our collective favorite logical fallacy, but some people’s favorite avocation.

I blame the media, as well as people. People's "news" have been reduced to headlines or 30 second clips on tiktok/insta. Of course they won't convey nuance.

And of course content creators / news aggregators know this so they purposely strip all nuance out of their reporting.

Re: A competitor crippled a $23.5M bootcamp by becoming a Reddit moderator

#867

Post by cap11235 »

cestith wrote: post #849
testdelacc1 wrote: post #820

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obviously. Please tell us why an account with a history of posting on Iranian subs was masquerading as a British person, getting British people riled up at 4am BST? And why did they delete the account immediately after this was pointed out? State sponsored doesn’t necessarily mean they’re highly competent.

People forget there are certain special interest groups and even individuals that have more resources to back such a campaign than many nation states. One such individual regularly promises his followers to change the results of his own LLM to match their beliefs, regardless of original training data.

[flagged]

Re: A competitor crippled a $23.5M bootcamp by becoming a Reddit moderator

#868

Post by cap11235 »

zahlman wrote: post #736
LaurensBER wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Moderation on Reddit has been questionable for a long time and its killing the site. To give some examples: - /r/energy used to ban everyone in favour of nuclear energy - If you post on /r/conservative you can expect to receive a bunch of bans from unrelated (popular) subs. Doesn't matter what you posted, being associated with that subs "taints" your account enough for some moderators. - /r/UnitedKingdom banned me fo…

I would share my own stories of bans, but they're so ridiculous (including all four of the "strikes" that led to my account ban by the admins) that I wouldn't expect anyone to believe it without evidence, and it all happened many years ago (but I fully expect things are even worse now). Although I do notice that r/science is apparently down to "only" about 1300 moderators. I'm pretty sure they broke 2000 at some poin…

All these sorts of bans are ridiculous. I got banned from a EU sub because I said my mother was polish, then someone doxxed out more info about me, and then I got criticism for not being a true Pole. This came only from me saying my mother was Polish. Fucking lunatics.

Re: A competitor crippled a $23.5M bootcamp by becoming a Reddit moderator

#869

Post by zahlman »

johnnyanmac wrote: post #841
zahlman wrote: post #715

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You left out the fact that you can’t post to /r/conservative until You present this as if it were somehow evidence that somehow justifies the bans from the other unrelated subs. There is no morally justifiable reason why having mainstream conservative viewpoints (which is to say, ones held by a very large fraction of the general populace) should bar someone from non-political participation in non-political subreddi…

>There is no morally justifiable reason why having mainstream conservative viewpoints (which is to say, ones held by a very large fraction of the general populace) should bar someone from non-political participation in non-political subreddits. Rule 1 of site guidelines includes: >Communities and users that incite violence or that promote hate based on identity or vulnerability will be banned. And given the conservai…

> And given the conservaive mindset as of late in the US against trans people and undocumented workers

I disagree that they have the beliefs you ascribe to them, broadly speaking. Again, we are talking about the mainstream. Views held by a very large fraction of the general populace.

Re: A competitor crippled a $23.5M bootcamp by becoming a Reddit moderator

#870

Post by johnnyanmac »

zahlman wrote: post #869
johnnyanmac wrote: post #841

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>There is no morally justifiable reason why having mainstream conservative viewpoints (which is to say, ones held by a very large fraction of the general populace) should bar someone from non-political participation in non-political subreddits. Rule 1 of site guidelines includes: >Communities and users that incite violence or that promote hate based on identity or vulnerability will be banned. And given the conservai…

> And given the conservaive mindset as of late in the US against trans people and undocumented workers I disagree that they have the beliefs you ascribe to them, broadly speaking. Again, we are talking about the mainstream. Views held by a very large fraction of the general populace.

>I disagree that they have the beliefs you ascribe to them, broadly speaking.

Very well. But their party leader does, and few in the party or even among constituents don't seem to push back on it at all. At the very least, they do not oppose the actions and statements taken and made.

Post reply on HN