5 ms·

> I feel like reddit ends up playing whack-a-mole with toxic subreddits because it's not like the problem users disappear - they just move onto another subreddi

> I feel like reddit ends up playing whack-a-mole with toxic subreddits because it's not like the problem users disappear - they just move onto another subreddit and slowly turn it into some flavor of the place that got banned/quarantined. On the contrary, at least one study found that what you describe does not happen. Rather, a quantitative reduction in hate speech was observed when Reddit banned a number of toxic subreddits in 2015. Inhabitants either moved off the platform entirely (accounts that frequented those subs ceased to be active) or those that stayed appeared to modulate their behaviour to conform to the norms of less-toxic subs. http://comp.social.gatech.edu/papers/cscw18-chand-hate.pdf http://comp.social.gatech.edu/papers/cscw18-chand-hate.pdf

creaghpatr 7y ago
The dynamics may be different with 750,000 subs (on T_D) compared to ~20,000 in the ones mentioned in the study. Political-related speech won't disappear from Reddit, especially with an election year coming up.
- msbarnett 7y ago
  > The dynamics may be different with 750,000 subs (on T_D) compared to ~20,000 in the ones mentioned in the study. They may be, they may not be. So far we have evidence that, in general, banning a sub doesn't result in it simply diasporaing into other subs. "Something different will happen this time because I feel like it will" isn't a terribly compelling counter-argument in and of itself. Absent new evidence, and given the evidence already in hand, this seems like a reasonable move to me. > Political-related speech won't disappear from Reddit, especially with an election year coming up. I don't think Reddit is attempting to "eliminate political-related speech" in general so much as the "I'm ready and willing to put a bullet in an Oregon cop's skull" speech that was being given free-reign in this subreddit?
  - creaghpatr 7y ago
    I just think people may be less likely to give up on sharing political speech than, say, "Fat people hate" or some other dumb offensive topic.
    - msbarnett 7y ago
      > I just think people may be less likely to give up on sharing political speech But again, that's probably not what they're trying to do so much as get people to give up on talking about organizing ad-hoc assassination squads of law enforcement officers
mdorazio 7y ago
Interesting. Thanks for the link on that.
SkyBelow 7y ago
>On the contrary, at least one study found Among social sciences a single study has very little weight. Given how often it is quoted despite this signals a flaw in popular cultures relationship with the field.
- msbarnett 7y ago
  > Among social sciences a single study has very little weight. Sure. "I feel like ..." has absolutely no evidentiary weight, though, so in this case, a little weight is strictly preferable to nothing. > Given how often it is quoted despite this signals a flaw in popular cultures relationship with the field. I'd say rather it signals a blind spot in the social sciences, where researchers are failing to investigate emerging online phenomenon wrt communities and moderation in significant numbers. More studies confirming or disproving the results of this one would, of course, be preferable. But we should hardly apologize for turning to what little study and evidence there is rather than pulling "this will cause X to happen" assertions directly from our asses.
  - SkyBelow 7y ago
    >I'd say rather it signals a blind spot in the social sciences, Apologies, it appears I wasn't clear. I meant the extent that psychology and sociology studies in any part of their fields are quoted when there is only a single study, not just in relationship to internet/social media. >But we should hardly apologize for turning to what little study and evidence there is rather than pulling "this will cause X to happen" assertions directly from our asses. The difference is in the latter case we are well aware of the origin, while in the former case many can mistaken think there is the full weight of science behind the findings comparable to the theory of gravity or evolution. They shouldn't make the mistake, but I've seen it made enough times.
- bduerst 7y ago
  You can only draw conclusions from available data, whether that's one or a dozen data points. Being a single data point doesn't invalidate the study though.

creaghpatr 7y ago

The dynamics may be different with 750,000 subs (on T_D) compared to ~20,000 in the ones mentioned in the study. Political-related speech won't disappear from Reddit, especially with an election year coming up.

msbarnett 7y ago
> The dynamics may be different with 750,000 subs (on T_D) compared to ~20,000 in the ones mentioned in the study. They may be, they may not be. So far we have evidence that, in general, banning a sub doesn't result in it simply diasporaing into other subs. "Something different will happen this time because I feel like it will" isn't a terribly compelling counter-argument in and of itself. Absent new evidence, and given the evidence already in hand, this seems like a reasonable move to me. > Political-related speech won't disappear from Reddit, especially with an election year coming up. I don't think Reddit is attempting to "eliminate political-related speech" in general so much as the "I'm ready and willing to put a bullet in an Oregon cop's skull" speech that was being given free-reign in this subreddit?
- creaghpatr 7y ago
  I just think people may be less likely to give up on sharing political speech than, say, "Fat people hate" or some other dumb offensive topic.
  - msbarnett 7y ago
    > I just think people may be less likely to give up on sharing political speech But again, that's probably not what they're trying to do so much as get people to give up on talking about organizing ad-hoc assassination squads of law enforcement officers

mdorazio 7y ago

Interesting. Thanks for the link on that.

SkyBelow 7y ago

>On the contrary, at least one study found Among social sciences a single study has very little weight. Given how often it is quoted despite this signals a flaw in popular cultures relationship with the field.

msbarnett 7y ago
> Among social sciences a single study has very little weight. Sure. "I feel like ..." has absolutely no evidentiary weight, though, so in this case, a little weight is strictly preferable to nothing. > Given how often it is quoted despite this signals a flaw in popular cultures relationship with the field. I'd say rather it signals a blind spot in the social sciences, where researchers are failing to investigate emerging online phenomenon wrt communities and moderation in significant numbers. More studies confirming or disproving the results of this one would, of course, be preferable. But we should hardly apologize for turning to what little study and evidence there is rather than pulling "this will cause X to happen" assertions directly from our asses.
- SkyBelow 7y ago
  >I'd say rather it signals a blind spot in the social sciences, Apologies, it appears I wasn't clear. I meant the extent that psychology and sociology studies in any part of their fields are quoted when there is only a single study, not just in relationship to internet/social media. >But we should hardly apologize for turning to what little study and evidence there is rather than pulling "this will cause X to happen" assertions directly from our asses. The difference is in the latter case we are well aware of the origin, while in the former case many can mistaken think there is the full weight of science behind the findings comparable to the theory of gravity or evolution. They shouldn't make the mistake, but I've seen it made enough times.
bduerst 7y ago
You can only draw conclusions from available data, whether that's one or a dozen data points. Being a single data point doesn't invalidate the study though.