4 ms·

I can't imagine a situation where someone has beliefs that do not affect his actions in any way. I would agree that unexpressed values would propagate less.

twblalock 10y ago
> I can't imagine a situation where someone has beliefs that do not affect his actions in any way. That was an extreme example used to illustrate the point I was making. Racism is also only an example; there are plenty of other beliefs that are bad for society. Personally, I suspect that sexism is probably far more prevalent on Reddit than racism, for example. Social stigma can prevent one's beliefs from affecting one's actions, or at least reduce the effect of those beliefs on one's actions. If it is shameful to be perceived as a racist, racists will attempt to hide their racism by not acting in racist ways toward others, at least when other people are looking. This does not obviate the effects of unconscious biases or eliminate racism, but the net result for society is fewer overtly racist actions, and that's a good thing. If racism becomes acceptable again, racists will feel freer to act on their beliefs, which will make life worse for the targets of their racism. So, there is a case to be made that if people repress their beliefs only partially, society is better off -- not as much better off as if certain people repressed their beliefs fully, but still better off. The danger of allowing racism to flourish in online communities, especially ones as large as Reddit and Twitter, is that it re-normalizes racism and makes it seem acceptable to be a racist. It can be more than merely acceptable -- it can even be a contrarian badge of pride, justified as a rebellion against political correctness. (That kind of justification for it is reinforced when anti-harassment policies are not uniformly and consistently enforced, because it can make moderation appear to be arbitrary or politically motivated.) When that kind of thing happens, it makes society worse.
- brokenmachine 10y ago
  Well said. I do not agree with giving up on freedom of speech because some people will say hurtful things. Every time I have read racism or seen racists on TV it has merely exposed how ill-informed, counter-productive and just plain wrong those ideas are, and has prompted myself and others to dispute those wrong ideas. There is also the slim chance that if the dummies are called out on their wrong ideas, they may end up changing them. Anonymous freedom of speech is a slightly different case, but I still feel that all freedom of speech is valuable and needs to be preserved.
- tamana 10y ago
  Now explain why Facebook has far worse racist garbage than Reddit (at least the parts that mainstream users see without digging for crap) proudly on display to family and friends and the public, Real Name and photos attached.
  - twblalock 10y ago
    Lots of people are racist. That is a sufficient explanation. However, I very strongly suspect that no matter what the level of racism on Facebook is, it would be far higher if people were able to post anonymously.
    - reitanqild 10y ago
      > However, I very strongly suspect that no matter what the level of racism on Facebook is, it would be far higher if people were able to post anonymously. Counterexample HN and arstechnica.com As I have previously hypothesised a lot of good users (me included) seems to be scared away by real names policies. Pseudonyms allowed and linked to phone numbers or national ids combined with karma seems like a workable middle ground for me.
- rmc 10y ago
  > If racism becomes acceptable again Some would say that racism is still acceptable in USA today. Just look at Trump. (Yes not as openly as before, but it hasn't been erradicated) There's a saying that the USA went from thinking that racism was OK, to not knowing what racism is.
bloaf 10y ago
Imagine that he never came into contact or communication with a person that he was racist against. E.g. a racist hermit.
- brokenmachine 10y ago
  In that case, then who cares what his ideas are? If a racist hermit is racist in the woods, does he make an offensive sound?
- afarrell 10y ago
  If a racist hermit never interacts directly with anyone, sure that is harmless. But if she actually just racially isolates herself (which is pretty hard to do in many parts of America), then she still has influence over the institutions around her. If someone then wants to join her racist gardening club, then her racism ends up affecting things.
adrianN 10y ago
There are probably many people who are sexually attracted to children but don't act on these feelings in any way.

twblalock 10y ago

> I can't imagine a situation where someone has beliefs that do not affect his actions in any way. That was an extreme example used to illustrate the point I was making. Racism is also only an example; there are plenty of other beliefs that are bad for society. Personally, I suspect that sexism is probably far more prevalent on Reddit than racism, for example. Social stigma can prevent one's beliefs from affecting one's actions, or at least reduce the effect of those beliefs on one's actions. If it is shameful to be perceived as a racist, racists will attempt to hide their racism by not acting in racist ways toward others, at least when other people are looking. This does not obviate the effects of unconscious biases or eliminate racism, but the net result for society is fewer overtly racist actions, and that's a good thing. If racism becomes acceptable again, racists will feel freer to act on their beliefs, which will make life worse for the targets of their racism. So, there is a case to be made that if people repress their beliefs only partially, society is better off -- not as much better off as if certain people repressed their beliefs fully, but still better off. The danger of allowing racism to flourish in online communities, especially ones as large as Reddit and Twitter, is that it re-normalizes racism and makes it seem acceptable to be a racist. It can be more than merely acceptable -- it can even be a contrarian badge of pride, justified as a rebellion against political correctness. (That kind of justification for it is reinforced when anti-harassment policies are not uniformly and consistently enforced, because it can make moderation appear to be arbitrary or politically motivated.) When that kind of thing happens, it makes society worse.

brokenmachine 10y ago
Well said. I do not agree with giving up on freedom of speech because some people will say hurtful things. Every time I have read racism or seen racists on TV it has merely exposed how ill-informed, counter-productive and just plain wrong those ideas are, and has prompted myself and others to dispute those wrong ideas. There is also the slim chance that if the dummies are called out on their wrong ideas, they may end up changing them. Anonymous freedom of speech is a slightly different case, but I still feel that all freedom of speech is valuable and needs to be preserved.
tamana 10y ago
Now explain why Facebook has far worse racist garbage than Reddit (at least the parts that mainstream users see without digging for crap) proudly on display to family and friends and the public, Real Name and photos attached.
- twblalock 10y ago
  Lots of people are racist. That is a sufficient explanation. However, I very strongly suspect that no matter what the level of racism on Facebook is, it would be far higher if people were able to post anonymously.
  - reitanqild 10y ago
    > However, I very strongly suspect that no matter what the level of racism on Facebook is, it would be far higher if people were able to post anonymously. Counterexample HN and arstechnica.com As I have previously hypothesised a lot of good users (me included) seems to be scared away by real names policies. Pseudonyms allowed and linked to phone numbers or national ids combined with karma seems like a workable middle ground for me.
rmc 10y ago
> If racism becomes acceptable again Some would say that racism is still acceptable in USA today. Just look at Trump. (Yes not as openly as before, but it hasn't been erradicated) There's a saying that the USA went from thinking that racism was OK, to not knowing what racism is.

bloaf 10y ago

Imagine that he never came into contact or communication with a person that he was racist against. E.g. a racist hermit.

brokenmachine 10y ago
In that case, then who cares what his ideas are? If a racist hermit is racist in the woods, does he make an offensive sound?
afarrell 10y ago
If a racist hermit never interacts directly with anyone, sure that is harmless. But if she actually just racially isolates herself (which is pretty hard to do in many parts of America), then she still has influence over the institutions around her. If someone then wants to join her racist gardening club, then her racism ends up affecting things.

adrianN 10y ago

There are probably many people who are sexually attracted to children but don't act on these feelings in any way.