4 ms·

To anyone wondering exactly what it looks like when all the people who can't keep from getting banned on Reddit go to the same place, go to voat.com It's toug

To anyone wondering exactly what it looks like when all the people who can't keep from getting banned on Reddit go to the same place, go to voat.com It's tough to take a look and wish everyone was mixed together instead of these people just communicating with each other.

afiori 7y ago
That is why you should not segregate society in "better" and "worse" tiers. We all understand that there are people that have a negative influence on every network they participate in. The problem is that banning them is not a long term solution and in many cases it only make things worse. It is the easy one, but it makes impossible to build some difficult conversations. There are also many different kind of communities and forums, HN is very special in this (no subcommunities, strong moderation clearly stated upfront) many are more like tumblr (as the FAQ put it: "Go nuts, show nuts, whatever"). Reddit is effectively used as a second life, with countless smaller groups, weird circles, and unusual communities. In this regard it is the social network most similar to real live.
- BubRoss 7y ago
  First, banning people absolutely does work. Second, these are internet forums, not segregating society. Third, if being around other people like yourself makes things worse, that isn't a problem that other people can solve for you. Finally, check out voat, incel groups, the_donald, etc. and see if you think it is just a matter of 'difficult conversation'. There is no rationality to conversations in extremist toxic internet forums. People have an emotional investment and frustration that looks far more like mental illness than actual discord.
  - afiori 7y ago
    > First, banning people absolutely does work. Agree, but not always in the direction we want or expect > Second, these are internet forums, not segregating society. This is an increasingly irrelevant distinction as we move more and more of our political debates over the internet (How often do people talk IRL with people of opposing view?) > Third, if being around other people like yourself makes things worse, that isn't a problem that other people can solve for you. Do you believe the same for addiction? Sorry for the strawman, but it is a silly statement. >Finally, check out voat, incel groups, the_donald, etc. [...] there is no rationality to conversations in extremist toxic internet forums. That is entirely the point, if you segregate the extremist and the moderate that is exactly what you get. Yes, banning more people is the solution to the problem caused by banning too many people (the 'too' is important). Without getting explicitly political it is important to point out that platforms ban people based on the consequences of not banning them. When you have strong external influences (like journalists asking loaded and threatening questions to create their own stories) platforms become a tool of political activists. Democracy and eager banning people from political discourse (Reddit less, but don't tell me that twitter is not fundamental in that) do not work well together.
    - BubRoss 7y ago
      Having a place where people tolerate your toxicity is not a legal right, human right or even on Maslow's hierarchy of needs. If people are addicted to being toxic, they will have to accept the consequences of others' reactions.
      - afiori 7y ago
        > Having a place where people tolerate your toxicity is not a legal right That is true, and also it is not what I argue for. > If people are addicted to being toxic, they will have to accept the consequences of others' reactions. Obviously, my problem is that I do not trust this use of toxic. What I see is contempt for Trump supporters and in general for less mainstream opinion. What I see are journalist that blur the line between what their job should be and explicit political activism with call to actions. You know what it is that I consider toxic? Actually claiming that a whole section of a demographic is toxic, or too stupid, or just wants to see the world burn. I have my experience with this, as an Italian I still cannot understand why people voted Berlusconi, yet even worse than another Berlosconi would be being trendy to think "we know better than them, their opinion is second class".
        BubRoss 7y ago
        The disconnect here is that you are either ignoring what goes on in these forums or actually don't know. They are a constant barrage of proganda with a steady stream of new people to hate and immediate bans for anyone who questions if something isn't right or if people are going too far. There is a reason that there is now far more right wing terrorism in the west than from any other group. If you think this is just about 'political opinions' then you are misinformed or severely downplaying the reality of what is going on. And once again, this is just a forum that isn't going to be linked to internally as much. It wasn't even banned. Why would Reddit activly promote a forum like this? They should have done it a long time ago.
        afiori 7y ago
        > The disconnect here is that you are either ignoring what goes on in these forums or actually don't know. My claim is exactly that the situation is as bad as it is exactly for this reason! You can argue this way with everything, if you let a problem fester enough it become easier and easier to claim there is no solution. > There is a reason that there is now far more right wing terrorism in the west than from any other group. On the other hand Antifa, who routinely attack minorities and passerby, is often heralded as the defender of justice. The difference in banning policies for the left and the right is obvious and with non trivial effects. Honestly I am more worried about how mainstream media is fueling this point of view and turning a blind eye to people calling for political violence. I do not think I will be able to better communicate my point. There are many factor at play and I must admit that I am not good enough to adequately order them into a coherent argument with enough evidences. On this topic I rather trust Tim Pool, he is a journalist that often cover this kind of topics. Here is a random video from some months ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4_6qSv0NRU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4_6qSv0NRU If you care to send me a link to kind of resources that can help me see your point I promise to take a look :)

afiori 7y ago

That is why you should not segregate society in "better" and "worse" tiers. We all understand that there are people that have a negative influence on every network they participate in. The problem is that banning them is not a long term solution and in many cases it only make things worse. It is the easy one, but it makes impossible to build some difficult conversations. There are also many different kind of communities and forums, HN is very special in this (no subcommunities, strong moderation clearly stated upfront) many are more like tumblr (as the FAQ put it: "Go nuts, show nuts, whatever"). Reddit is effectively used as a second life, with countless smaller groups, weird circles, and unusual communities. In this regard it is the social network most similar to real live.

BubRoss 7y ago
First, banning people absolutely does work. Second, these are internet forums, not segregating society. Third, if being around other people like yourself makes things worse, that isn't a problem that other people can solve for you. Finally, check out voat, incel groups, the_donald, etc. and see if you think it is just a matter of 'difficult conversation'. There is no rationality to conversations in extremist toxic internet forums. People have an emotional investment and frustration that looks far more like mental illness than actual discord.
- afiori 7y ago
  > First, banning people absolutely does work. Agree, but not always in the direction we want or expect > Second, these are internet forums, not segregating society. This is an increasingly irrelevant distinction as we move more and more of our political debates over the internet (How often do people talk IRL with people of opposing view?) > Third, if being around other people like yourself makes things worse, that isn't a problem that other people can solve for you. Do you believe the same for addiction? Sorry for the strawman, but it is a silly statement. >Finally, check out voat, incel groups, the_donald, etc. [...] there is no rationality to conversations in extremist toxic internet forums. That is entirely the point, if you segregate the extremist and the moderate that is exactly what you get. Yes, banning more people is the solution to the problem caused by banning too many people (the 'too' is important). Without getting explicitly political it is important to point out that platforms ban people based on the consequences of not banning them. When you have strong external influences (like journalists asking loaded and threatening questions to create their own stories) platforms become a tool of political activists. Democracy and eager banning people from political discourse (Reddit less, but don't tell me that twitter is not fundamental in that) do not work well together.
  - BubRoss 7y ago
    Having a place where people tolerate your toxicity is not a legal right, human right or even on Maslow's hierarchy of needs. If people are addicted to being toxic, they will have to accept the consequences of others' reactions.
    - afiori 7y ago
      > Having a place where people tolerate your toxicity is not a legal right That is true, and also it is not what I argue for. > If people are addicted to being toxic, they will have to accept the consequences of others' reactions. Obviously, my problem is that I do not trust this use of toxic. What I see is contempt for Trump supporters and in general for less mainstream opinion. What I see are journalist that blur the line between what their job should be and explicit political activism with call to actions. You know what it is that I consider toxic? Actually claiming that a whole section of a demographic is toxic, or too stupid, or just wants to see the world burn. I have my experience with this, as an Italian I still cannot understand why people voted Berlusconi, yet even worse than another Berlosconi would be being trendy to think "we know better than them, their opinion is second class".
      - BubRoss 7y ago
        The disconnect here is that you are either ignoring what goes on in these forums or actually don't know. They are a constant barrage of proganda with a steady stream of new people to hate and immediate bans for anyone who questions if something isn't right or if people are going too far. There is a reason that there is now far more right wing terrorism in the west than from any other group. If you think this is just about 'political opinions' then you are misinformed or severely downplaying the reality of what is going on. And once again, this is just a forum that isn't going to be linked to internally as much. It wasn't even banned. Why would Reddit activly promote a forum like this? They should have done it a long time ago.
        afiori 7y ago
        > The disconnect here is that you are either ignoring what goes on in these forums or actually don't know. My claim is exactly that the situation is as bad as it is exactly for this reason! You can argue this way with everything, if you let a problem fester enough it become easier and easier to claim there is no solution. > There is a reason that there is now far more right wing terrorism in the west than from any other group. On the other hand Antifa, who routinely attack minorities and passerby, is often heralded as the defender of justice. The difference in banning policies for the left and the right is obvious and with non trivial effects. Honestly I am more worried about how mainstream media is fueling this point of view and turning a blind eye to people calling for political violence. I do not think I will be able to better communicate my point. There are many factor at play and I must admit that I am not good enough to adequately order them into a coherent argument with enough evidences. On this topic I rather trust Tim Pool, he is a journalist that often cover this kind of topics. Here is a random video from some months ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4_6qSv0NRU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4_6qSv0NRU If you care to send me a link to kind of resources that can help me see your point I promise to take a look :)