Reddit and the Struggle to Detoxify the Internet • Hacker News Board

Re: Reddit and the Struggle to Detoxify the Internet

#91

Post by losteric » Mon, Mar 12, 2018, 6:59 PM UTC

gruez wrote: post #40

losteric wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tampering can be detected with internet archives and data dumps of Reddit submissions/comments.

and how many people are running bots/scrapers to do this? also, how do you know whether the OP edited it, or it was an admin?

There are multiple sources of internet archives and reddit-specific archivals.

re: edits; check whether the post sentiment changes, I'm not worried about admins fixing typos/grammar.

Also, investors understand trust is a prerequisite to profit... editing shenanigans are intolerable.

Re: Reddit and the Struggle to Detoxify the Internet

#92

Post by Balgair » Mon, Mar 12, 2018, 7:02 PM UTC

_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…

Relate 'karma' to the ability to post at all?

More karma, more posting; less karma, less posting. Everyone starts every month/week/day with only so much, no roll-over per timeframe. Modify it so that 'popular' threads cost more to post in. You can give karma to others too via the upvote and take it away with a downvote, but still no roll-over. Troll/shill accounts would still get upped around en masse, but less so and it would be 'easier' for mods to tell. (I'm sure you can model this without too much effort vis a vi prisoner's dilemma). You'd have to pick and choose which to comment in. Posting content would work similarly, but a slight mod to the cost to posting.

Re: Reddit and the Struggle to Detoxify the Internet

#93

Post by Slansitartop » Mon, Mar 12, 2018, 7:04 PM UTC

mozumder wrote: post #49

xenihn wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reddit initially rose to prominence because of bad decisions on Digg's part. Reddit is nothing without its users. Any decision that potentially drives users off its platform can't be made lightly.

As a media business, they can be a lot more profitable with fewer high-quality users than hordes of low-quality toxic users. A fashion magazine only has 1 million subscribers, but can make $400 million/year in revenue, basically printing money.

> As a media business, they can be a lot more profitable with fewer high-quality users than hordes of low-quality toxic users.

I see no evidence of that.

> A fashion magazine only has 1 million subscribers, but can make $400 million/year in revenue, basically printing money.

A fashion magazine doesn't outsource its content production to its subscribers.

Re: Reddit and the Struggle to Detoxify the Internet

#94

Post by castis » Mon, Mar 12, 2018, 7:07 PM UTC

devmunchies wrote: post #45

castis wrote: post #15

As long as there are no consequences to being a dick to people over the internet, "toxic internet" is here to stay.

Sticks and stones. More concerning is the large scale propaganda and marketing.

This has nothing to do with "getting your feelings hurt".

If someone is a dick to you IRL, you just go about life without them and its of zero consequence to you. Imagine if they stayed in your life outside of your own accord and just yelled dumb shit at you from the sidelines.

Not everyone is built as strong as you, it bothers some people.

Re: Reddit and the Struggle to Detoxify the Internet

#95

Post by kazanz » Mon, Mar 12, 2018, 7:09 PM UTC

I'd argue that a cross-internet reputation service would fix this problem.

1. The reputation system is affected by voting on all sites in which you participate.

2. The history of your participation across sites is viewable in your history (ala reddit, HN)

3. Your reputation is displayed with you participation wherever you participate.

Sites could then put reputation limits only allowing users above a certain reputation to participate. Making the cost of toxicity increase.

The biggest problem would be getting the walled gardens to adopt the system.

Re: Reddit and the Struggle to Detoxify the Internet

#96

Post by branchless » Mon, Mar 12, 2018, 7:10 PM UTC

_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…

Not quite correct.

We've tried:

- Real identities (Facebook comments)

- Voting and self moderation (Reddit, HN, etc.)

- Strong moderation (Reddit, HN)

All within the context of rampant financialisation, land policies returning us to feudalism and continuous lying about the banking bailout including removing the one candidate who was going to take on the banks (Bernie).

Maybe it's not "the internet" that's the problem. Maybe the dissemination of information as we slide into this rentier hellpit is causing people to be pretty pissed off?

Re: Reddit and the Struggle to Detoxify the Internet

#97

Post by draw_down » Mon, Mar 12, 2018, 7:11 PM UTC

castis wrote: post #15

As long as there are no consequences to being a dick to people over the internet, "toxic internet" is here to stay.

I think there are definitely layers here. One of the things happening is that people who ultimately support all sorts of awful things like genocide and racial cleansing get upset when people are rude to them on the internet, as if that were the real problem. There are a lot of priorities out of whack.

Re: Reddit and the Struggle to Detoxify the Internet

#98

Post by taurath » Mon, Mar 12, 2018, 7:13 PM UTC

dieterrams wrote: post #17

ScipioAfricanus wrote: post #8

It's not that the "trolls are winning", it's that people are allowing the trolls to bother them. Trolls have always existed; it's our heightened sensitivity and inability to just shrug them off or laugh in the face of their obscenity that's letting them "win".

Trying to get everyone to not be bothered by trolls is a massive and neverending undertaking.

Its also impossible. You're not going to have a close conversation with a group of people when a little kid is jumping up and down and screaming for attention in public. Ignoring them doesn't work for either trolls or bullys. Either they run the show, or you do something about them, end of story.

Re: Reddit and the Struggle to Detoxify the Internet

#99

Post by antishatter » Mon, Mar 12, 2018, 7:13 PM UTC

_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.

Re: Reddit and the Struggle to Detoxify the Internet

#100

Post by jerf » Mon, Mar 12, 2018, 7:15 PM UTC

kazanz wrote: post #95

I'd argue that a cross-internet reputation service would fix this problem. 1. The reputation system is affected by voting on all sites in which you participate. 2. The history of your participation across sites is viewable in your history (ala reddit, HN) 3. Your reputation is displayed with you participation wherever you participate. Sites could then put reputation limits only allowing users above a certain reputati…

Single-dimensional "karma" numbers are part of the problem.

If you allow multi-dimensional karma then you have the problem that aggregation mechanisms are going to be site-specific (in karma systems, 1 + 1 is not necessarily equal to 2 even before considering multidimensionality) and you end up drawn back to the individual sites hosting the concept anyhow.