4 ms·

The effect is extremely similar though, don't you think? If not worse, for e.g. shadow banning.

by sambe 7y ago

dang 7y ago
Shadowbanning on HN is mostly for spammers and new accounts that show evidence of past abuses. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20shadowban&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que... Once an account has a history on HN, we tell people that we're banning them and why. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&query=by%3Adang%20banned%20account&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...
- crankylinuxuser 7y ago
  Perhaps you should have a public transparency log for all mod-determined transgressions. Might allay some of the accusations we're seeing here of accused abuses.
  - dang 7y ago
    My sense is that it would lead to an order-of-magnitude explosion of litgious meta discussion, which is last thing we we need or want. If that's right, then it's worse than that, because then metaness would consume a lot more resources than it already does, starving the rest of the site of other things we need to work on. That would be a vicious feedback loop; I'd rather look for virtuous ones.
  - DoreenMichele 7y ago
    HN is quite a lot larger than anything I've personally moderated. There are scaling issues involved.
  - tptacek 7y ago
    HN moderation is far more transparent than it was before Dan took over (when 'pg moderated, things like subjective shadow bans really were a norm), and more transparent than it was when he started --- I hesitate to explain how, for fear of fulfilling Dan's prophecy, but one simple, not-fraught example would be the expansion of the guidelines. I perceive no corresponding change in the amount of meta threads about mis-moderation; noodling debates based on random accusations are still evergreen here. If I were involved in moderating HN (thank Christ I'm not), I'd conclude that substantive process-level changes aimed at quelling these kinds of debates probably aren't a productive goal.
- YeGoblynQueenne 7y ago
  TIL that I can search for comments by:<case_sensitive_username>. Well, I never!
DoreenMichele 7y ago
I apologize. I've used the term "shadow banned" inaccurately. It's apparently a synonym for something I only think of as hell banned. My quirky brain thinks of HN banning as shadow banning because the comments are visible if you have "show dead" on and can often be brought back to life if couched for. (So, you live in the shadows.) Thus being banned on HN doesn't necessarily mean you have no voice at all. It can mean fewer people will see your comments and only good comments will be brought to life. This leaves the door open for expressing yourself and even for potentially finding your way back to being a member in good standing, though that may only happen if something substantially changes an your life. But people do, at times, have substantial positive changes. Homeless people do sometimes get back into housing. Very sick people do sometimes get better. Drug addicts do sometimes get clean. And then their behavior may improve without them "trying to behave better" because their life sucks less.
- YeGoblynQueenne 7y ago
  I don't understand the association you're making between having personal problems and being an asshole in online conversations. In my experience, on the one hand, most adults have some sort of personal problem that complicates their life, and on the other hand, people who dont' seem to be very troubled by what goes on in their personal life are perfectly capable of being disruptive assholes. So there is really no reason to single out specific classes of personal problems as causing disruptive behaviour. I'm also confused by the way you use the term "sick". Do you mean it as in mental illness, or general sickness, like having the flu, or a chronic disease? In any case, I think you're looking for a deeper explanation of why people behave like assholes online. I don't think there is one. People sometimes behave like assholes online, even when they're perfectly fine people otherwise. You just have to find a way to make them see their contributions as others see them, then they will stop being assholes because nobody likes to come accorss as an asshole. Online or off.

The effect is extremely similar though, don't you think? If not worse, for e.g. shadow banning.

by sambe 7y ago

The effect is extremely similar though, don't you think? If not worse, for e.g. shadow banning.

dang 7y ago

Shadowbanning on HN is mostly for spammers and new accounts that show evidence of past abuses. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20shadowban&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que... Once an account has a history on HN, we tell people that we're banning them and why. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&query=by%3Adang%20banned%20account&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...

crankylinuxuser 7y ago
Perhaps you should have a public transparency log for all mod-determined transgressions. Might allay some of the accusations we're seeing here of accused abuses.
- dang 7y ago
  My sense is that it would lead to an order-of-magnitude explosion of litgious meta discussion, which is last thing we we need or want. If that's right, then it's worse than that, because then metaness would consume a lot more resources than it already does, starving the rest of the site of other things we need to work on. That would be a vicious feedback loop; I'd rather look for virtuous ones.
- DoreenMichele 7y ago
  HN is quite a lot larger than anything I've personally moderated. There are scaling issues involved.
- tptacek 7y ago
  HN moderation is far more transparent than it was before Dan took over (when 'pg moderated, things like subjective shadow bans really were a norm), and more transparent than it was when he started --- I hesitate to explain how, for fear of fulfilling Dan's prophecy, but one simple, not-fraught example would be the expansion of the guidelines. I perceive no corresponding change in the amount of meta threads about mis-moderation; noodling debates based on random accusations are still evergreen here. If I were involved in moderating HN (thank Christ I'm not), I'd conclude that substantive process-level changes aimed at quelling these kinds of debates probably aren't a productive goal.
YeGoblynQueenne 7y ago
TIL that I can search for comments by:<case_sensitive_username>. Well, I never!

DoreenMichele 7y ago

I apologize. I've used the term "shadow banned" inaccurately. It's apparently a synonym for something I only think of as hell banned. My quirky brain thinks of HN banning as shadow banning because the comments are visible if you have "show dead" on and can often be brought back to life if couched for. (So, you live in the shadows.) Thus being banned on HN doesn't necessarily mean you have no voice at all. It can mean fewer people will see your comments and only good comments will be brought to life. This leaves the door open for expressing yourself and even for potentially finding your way back to being a member in good standing, though that may only happen if something substantially changes an your life. But people do, at times, have substantial positive changes. Homeless people do sometimes get back into housing. Very sick people do sometimes get better. Drug addicts do sometimes get clean. And then their behavior may improve without them "trying to behave better" because their life sucks less.

YeGoblynQueenne 7y ago
I don't understand the association you're making between having personal problems and being an asshole in online conversations. In my experience, on the one hand, most adults have some sort of personal problem that complicates their life, and on the other hand, people who dont' seem to be very troubled by what goes on in their personal life are perfectly capable of being disruptive assholes. So there is really no reason to single out specific classes of personal problems as causing disruptive behaviour. I'm also confused by the way you use the term "sick". Do you mean it as in mental illness, or general sickness, like having the flu, or a chronic disease? In any case, I think you're looking for a deeper explanation of why people behave like assholes online. I don't think there is one. People sometimes behave like assholes online, even when they're perfectly fine people otherwise. You just have to find a way to make them see their contributions as others see them, then they will stop being assholes because nobody likes to come accorss as an asshole. Online or off.