4 ms·

> . If you don't moderate, you'll get any kind of content, including spam, troll, etc.. There is a reasonable solution to this. Give people the tools to self

by stale2002 7y ago

> . If you don't moderate, you'll get any kind of content, including spam, troll, etc.. There is a reasonable solution to this. Give people the tools to self moderate. Things like reddit, for example, work pretty great, in that if you don't like a community, then you can go to a different one, which moderation rules that you prefer.

AnthonyMouse 7y ago
But how does that work as a regulation? It's hard enough to get community moderators to sign up to do unpleasant work for no money, how do you expect to get anyone to do it after you impose liability for getting it wrong? Actually, maybe there's something to this: Impose no liability on anybody for moderating as long as they're not moderating more than ten million users. If you are, the only way to avoid liability is to be a common carrier. Then you can actually have community moderation, but you can't have Zuckerberg deciding what a billion people don't get to see.
- stale2002 7y ago
  > how do you expect to get anyone to do it after you impose liability for getting it wrong? I am suggesting that there would no platform wide moderation, but would instead be things like public block lists that users could voluntarily subscribe to. IE, on Twitter, anyone could publish a "spam account list" or whatever, and people could choose whatever their preferred block list is. Or they could choose not to follow any block lists, if they so desire. Some blocklists might only block spammers, another might block Donald Trump, and another might block anyone who posts any swear words at all, and individual people would choose how they would like to view their content.
root_axis 7y ago
> Things like reddit, for example, work pretty great, in that if you don't like a community, then you can go to a different one, which moderation rules that you prefer. The internet already works this way, if you don't like the moderation policies of a website you have the freedom to use a different website.
- stale2002 7y ago
  > The internet already works this way, I am referring to platforms. No, most platforms do not work this way.
  - root_axis 7y ago
    >Things like reddit, for example, work pretty great, in that if you don't like a community, then you can go to a different one, which moderation rules that you prefer What you have described here is exactly how all websites work. If you don't like the site moderation you are free to use a different site, just like on reddit.com except you change a few more characters in the URL bar.
    - stale2002 7y ago
      > What you have described here is exactly how all websites work Not within the platform, no. It is easy to create another subreddit. And if you create another subreddit, you have full access to all the same Reddit infrastructure as every other redditor. I am talking about access to the platform. > Except you change a few more characters No, you would not have access to all the Reddit infrastructure, and access to all the cross site stuff, using the same Reddit account. It is pretty easy to move across Reddit, and within Reddit, and get all the advantages of it. You don't get all those advantages, if it is another website. Other people can't use, for example, the same mobile Reddit app, to access your website, and would have to download a new app. They can't log in using the same account. They can't keep track of their posting history, all through the same user link. There are numerous examples like that. There are lots and lots of benefits to using the actual Reddit website, compared to using a different website. So no, you cannot just create a new website, and get all of the very significant benefits that you would get, from having it all on Reddit, using the same infrastructure, and account, and mobile app, and posting history, and follower list, ect,ect ect, for example.
      - root_axis 7y ago
        > Not within the platform, no. What does this sentence mean? No what? On what platform? > It is easy to create another subreddit It is easy to create another website. > if you create another subreddit, you have full access to all the same Reddit infrastructure as every other redditor So what? There is no distinction from a moderation perspective. If you don't like how the mods run a subreddit you can use a different subreddit, same as any other forum on the internet. > So no, you cannot just create a new website, and get all of the very significant benefits that you would get, from having it all on Reddit, using the same infrastructure, and account, and mobile app, and posting history, and follower list, ect,ect ect, for example. Yes you can just create a new website or use a different. You don't "own" the users of reddit.com, there is no reason why one should be entitled to the infrastructure or the users.
goatinaboat 7y ago
Give people the tools to self moderate. In the old days on Usenet we had “killfiles”. It worked pretty well.
- jefftk 7y ago
  Killfiles did not work well, and are part of why Usenet died. Long-time members will have good killfiles and a relatively good experience, yes, but new members start with getting every message. Building up a killfile involved a long process of deciding who was worth reading, which is a large investment when you've just started getting into a channel.
  - goatinaboat 7y ago
    Having killfiles dictated by a central authority is completely missing the point. In the old days everyone made up their own minds.
sobani 7y ago
Until Reddit decides your community is not OK and will quarantine you like https://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/ https://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/ or outright ban you like https://www.reddit.com/r/watchpeopledie https://www.reddit.com/r/watchpeopledie Self moderation only works up to a certain extend.

AnthonyMouse 7y ago

But how does that work as a regulation? It's hard enough to get community moderators to sign up to do unpleasant work for no money, how do you expect to get anyone to do it after you impose liability for getting it wrong? Actually, maybe there's something to this: Impose no liability on anybody for moderating as long as they're not moderating more than ten million users. If you are, the only way to avoid liability is to be a common carrier. Then you can actually have community moderation, but you can't have Zuckerberg deciding what a billion people don't get to see.

stale2002 7y ago
> how do you expect to get anyone to do it after you impose liability for getting it wrong? I am suggesting that there would no platform wide moderation, but would instead be things like public block lists that users could voluntarily subscribe to. IE, on Twitter, anyone could publish a "spam account list" or whatever, and people could choose whatever their preferred block list is. Or they could choose not to follow any block lists, if they so desire. Some blocklists might only block spammers, another might block Donald Trump, and another might block anyone who posts any swear words at all, and individual people would choose how they would like to view their content.

root_axis 7y ago

> Things like reddit, for example, work pretty great, in that if you don't like a community, then you can go to a different one, which moderation rules that you prefer. The internet already works this way, if you don't like the moderation policies of a website you have the freedom to use a different website.

stale2002 7y ago
> The internet already works this way, I am referring to platforms. No, most platforms do not work this way.
- root_axis 7y ago
  >Things like reddit, for example, work pretty great, in that if you don't like a community, then you can go to a different one, which moderation rules that you prefer What you have described here is exactly how all websites work. If you don't like the site moderation you are free to use a different site, just like on reddit.com except you change a few more characters in the URL bar.
  - stale2002 7y ago
    > What you have described here is exactly how all websites work Not within the platform, no. It is easy to create another subreddit. And if you create another subreddit, you have full access to all the same Reddit infrastructure as every other redditor. I am talking about access to the platform. > Except you change a few more characters No, you would not have access to all the Reddit infrastructure, and access to all the cross site stuff, using the same Reddit account. It is pretty easy to move across Reddit, and within Reddit, and get all the advantages of it. You don't get all those advantages, if it is another website. Other people can't use, for example, the same mobile Reddit app, to access your website, and would have to download a new app. They can't log in using the same account. They can't keep track of their posting history, all through the same user link. There are numerous examples like that. There are lots and lots of benefits to using the actual Reddit website, compared to using a different website. So no, you cannot just create a new website, and get all of the very significant benefits that you would get, from having it all on Reddit, using the same infrastructure, and account, and mobile app, and posting history, and follower list, ect,ect ect, for example.
    - root_axis 7y ago
      > Not within the platform, no. What does this sentence mean? No what? On what platform? > It is easy to create another subreddit It is easy to create another website. > if you create another subreddit, you have full access to all the same Reddit infrastructure as every other redditor So what? There is no distinction from a moderation perspective. If you don't like how the mods run a subreddit you can use a different subreddit, same as any other forum on the internet. > So no, you cannot just create a new website, and get all of the very significant benefits that you would get, from having it all on Reddit, using the same infrastructure, and account, and mobile app, and posting history, and follower list, ect,ect ect, for example. Yes you can just create a new website or use a different. You don't "own" the users of reddit.com, there is no reason why one should be entitled to the infrastructure or the users.

goatinaboat 7y ago

Give people the tools to self moderate. In the old days on Usenet we had “killfiles”. It worked pretty well.

jefftk 7y ago
Killfiles did not work well, and are part of why Usenet died. Long-time members will have good killfiles and a relatively good experience, yes, but new members start with getting every message. Building up a killfile involved a long process of deciding who was worth reading, which is a large investment when you've just started getting into a channel.
- goatinaboat 7y ago
  Having killfiles dictated by a central authority is completely missing the point. In the old days everyone made up their own minds.

sobani 7y ago

Until Reddit decides your community is not OK and will quarantine you like https://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/ https://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/ or outright ban you like https://www.reddit.com/r/watchpeopledie https://www.reddit.com/r/watchpeopledie Self moderation only works up to a certain extend.