3 ms·

But isn't there more to the story here? One of the commenters indicated that FB took down that page for being "violent in nature" (details not provided) -- not

• robryk 10y ago
  Disclaimer: I know noting about this particular case. It is possible to fool FB into removing a page or some content. One way that is sometimes attempted (with some success) is to spam the comments on the page with objectionable content (hopefully goading other people to respond in kind) or (if it's an open group) join it and do the same. Then have other people report the page. Also, simple misunderstandings happen. E.g. a post gets removed due to being threatening; in fact the post was just citing a threat allegedly made by an official. This seems to be even more likely to happen if many people report that content as objectionable: thus, people opposed to some organization/idea organize into mobs that report related posts as being objectionable.
  • tedunangst 10y ago
    Seems fairly easy for the group admin to flag abusive posters. If there's no active admin, is it such a great loss for the group to shut down?
    • robryk 10y ago
      This depends on the throughput of spamming that's going on. The throughput can be quite large if there's a significant amount of people cooperating. Also, this means that admins have to spend a nontrivial amount of time on such work on every single day. The examples I know of are groups of political movements that have a lot of haters, so that might be somewhat of an edge case.