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

TikTok told moderators to suppress posts by “ugly” people and the poor

theintercept.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 356 posts

Re: TikTok told moderators to suppress posts by “ugly” people and the poor

#91

Post by dx87 »

afterburner wrote: post #73
catalogia wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the pretty people don't want an ugly guy like me around, then why would an ugly guy like me want to hang out with those pretty people? It seems like a "nothing of value was lost" situation. I'd rather hang out with people that enjoy my presence. What would shaming them for this accomplish? Is the idea to shame them so much that they pretend to like ugly people like me? What would be the point of that?

Why would you not shame them? Shaming is free and legally inconsequential. You are essentially saying no one has the right to complain.

It costs your time and energy. There must be a better use of your time than trying to shame nightclubs.

Re: TikTok told moderators to suppress posts by “ugly” people and the poor

#92

Post by Fauntleroy »

ShorsHammer wrote: post #56
afterburner wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So should high end nightclubs be publicly shamed for doing what they do (when what their "users" want is exactly non-ugly people) and driven out of business? Sure, why not?

Should MENSA be shutdown on the grounds of it's discriminatory membership model?

MENSA should voluntarily shut down, for other reasons.

Re: TikTok told moderators to suppress posts by “ugly” people and the poor

#93

Post by afterburner »

catalogia wrote: post #87
afterburner wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you not shame them? Shaming is free and legally inconsequential. You are essentially saying no one has the right to complain.

I don't shame people unless I think it will accomplish something productive. I wouldn't think of denying that you have the right to shame people for whatever reason you like, but I choose not to do it myself unless I see a good reason for it.

To affect their behaviour, obviously. To provide negative feedback.

Re: TikTok told moderators to suppress posts by “ugly” people and the poor

#94

Post by enneff »

catalogia wrote: post #59
ccktlmazeltov wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think what a lot of nightclubs end up doing is definitely discriminatory and we should not tolerate that.

If the pretty people don't want an ugly guy like me around, then why would an ugly guy like me want to hang out with those pretty people? It seems like a "nothing of value was lost" situation. I'd rather hang out with people that enjoy my presence. What would shaming them for this accomplish? Is the idea to shame them so much that they pretend to like ugly people like me? What would be the point of that?

Not sure why you’re being downvoted here. Everyone knows that there are exclusive cliques and there always will be. If you desperately want to be part of a group that doesn’t want you, then that’s your problem to overcome.

Re: TikTok told moderators to suppress posts by “ugly” people and the poor

#95

Post by afterburner »

dx87 wrote: post #91
afterburner wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you not shame them? Shaming is free and legally inconsequential. You are essentially saying no one has the right to complain.

It costs your time and energy. There must be a better use of your time than trying to shame nightclubs.

I'm responding to people who are using their time and energy saying they shouldn't be shamed. I wonder why they're wasting their energy with counter-shaming?

Re: TikTok told moderators to suppress posts by “ugly” people and the poor

#96

Post by s_y_n_t_a_x »

volak wrote: post #74
s_y_n_t_a_x wrote: post #39

> These same documents show moderators were also told to censor political speech in TikTok livestreams, punishing those who harmed “national honor” or broadcast streams about “state organs such as police” with bans from the platform. This is the story. Why would anyone use a CPC social media platform?

Presumably because a lot of attractive young people do That's explicitly the point. Yes its evil and manipulative - but everyone should understand CPC is not above such tactics. And neither are pop magazines, holywood.. other people Its an ugly world out there

More because of the money they dumped into advertising.

I wouldn't equate pop magazines to the people who run concentration camps and silence anyone who talks ill of them.

Re: TikTok told moderators to suppress posts by “ugly” people and the poor

#97

Post by leereeves »

whoisjuan wrote: post #88
leereeves wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And 100 years ago race, sex, and sexual orientation weren't protected classes. Society makes progress, slowly.

But how can you objectively establish that somebody is unattractive? Assuming the world moves into this hypothetical society you're describing nobody wants to be part of that new protected class. If you're by some semantic classified as unattractive, you will automatically feel segregated and marginalized. This is not like sexual orientation where non-heterosexual people actually have a desire to express their sexual…

People in this hypothetical protected class are placed there by others. They're already segregated and marginalized, and generally no one asks them if they want that.

We have an example of that right here from TikTok.

Re: TikTok told moderators to suppress posts by “ugly” people and the poor

#98

Post by strken »

cocktailpeanuts wrote: post #20

How is this different from nightclubs having a high bar to entry? I am not saying this is an ethical thing to do, I am saying these apps are no different from nightclubs and they gotta do what they gotta do to survive. And no matter what you may say, humans prefer non ugly people over ugly people. I am sorry but this is simply how humans work. If you disagree, then you are a hypocrite. So should high end nightclubs b…

> So should high end nightclubs be publicly shamed for doing what they do (when what their "users" want is exactly non-ugly people)

TikTok users aren't aware of filtering yet, so telling them is a social good. Humans may prefer to see beautiful people, but filtering out ugly people means the majority of users will be below average compared to the content they view. They should at least know it's happening.

> and driven out of business?

Has this happened to TikTok?

Re: TikTok told moderators to suppress posts by “ugly” people and the poor

#99

Post by dx87 »

cocktailpeanuts wrote: post #20

How is this different from nightclubs having a high bar to entry? I am not saying this is an ethical thing to do, I am saying these apps are no different from nightclubs and they gotta do what they gotta do to survive. And no matter what you may say, humans prefer non ugly people over ugly people. I am sorry but this is simply how humans work. If you disagree, then you are a hypocrite. So should high end nightclubs b…

It also doesn't seem any different than restaurants that require a certain dress code. I remember being denied entry to a night club because I showed up wearing jeans and a t-shirt (it was a big group of us who didn't plan to go to a nightclub, but one member of our group knew the owner and said we should go). The only issue I could see is that TikTok isn't up front about about their "attractiveness" requirements.

Re: TikTok told moderators to suppress posts by “ugly” people and the poor

#100

Post by chenster »

cocktailpeanuts wrote: post #20

How is this different from nightclubs having a high bar to entry? I am not saying this is an ethical thing to do, I am saying these apps are no different from nightclubs and they gotta do what they gotta do to survive. And no matter what you may say, humans prefer non ugly people over ugly people. I am sorry but this is simply how humans work. If you disagree, then you are a hypocrite. So should high end nightclubs b…

Since we are feeding the trolls on the subject of discriminating by appearances, comparing against night clubs is flawed. A night club should not allow just pretty people to enter because simply it is not fair. There might be a hidden rule for some but it doesn't mean that is the right thing to do to begin with. Tiktok is a social network for anyone to join. If they allow anyone to join but only want the good looking people to post, how is that not the hypocritical thing to do? It's increasingly becoming an issue on Social Neutrality (https://www.wsj.com/articles/what-about-social-media-neutral...)
Post reply on HN