6 ms·

>how meaninglessly violent people become when their posts are modded Maybe if mods were more transparent across all the subs. Most people get angry when someo

>how meaninglessly violent people become when their posts are modded Maybe if mods were more transparent across all the subs. Most people get angry when someone removes their post and yet they see it reposted and approved hours or even minutes later (Gallowboob is infamous for that but regular users do it too)

Someone1234 6y ago
> Maybe if mods were more transparent across all the subs. Don't get me started. Particularly "muting" posts with auto-moderator (silently hiding them for others without notification/warning/explanation). It was originally created for spam control but is regularly abused for generic moderation. It needs more controls placed on it. To give a recent example, I wrote a long reply in /r/fitness's daily discussion but it was muted because it contained an offhand remark about COVID-19 (vis-a-vis getting hold of fitness equipment right now). Why are they muting all comments that contain "COVID?" Who even knows, but the /way/ it was done was pretty irksome and resulted in wasted effort on my part for a comment that violated zero published rules or etiquette. /r/politics has a huge dictionary of phases and idioms that result in auto muting. None of which are defined in their rules.
- teddyh 6y ago
  > /r/politics has a huge dictionary of phases and idioms that result in auto muting. None of which are defined in their rules. This is true here on HN too. One such word that I’ve seen to cause comments get auto-killed is “m∗sturbation” (censored for obvious reasons), and I am sure there are others.
  - syshum 6y ago
    Plenty of people complain about overmoderation here on HN as well... I am one of those people
    - ativzzz 6y ago
      I firmly believe that the only way an online forum, particularly an anonymous one with free signups can remain relatively civil is very heavy handed moderation. This is not a free speech zone (it's a privately owned space), and the only way to prevent bad actors is to be very liberal in applying heavy moderation. If a few "medium" actors get banned by accident, that's the price to pay for the rest of us getting to enjoy discussing tech without dealing with a toxic cesspool.
      - verylittlemeat 6y ago
        I strongly disagree. Bad actors thrive just as well if not better in places with moderation and even sign up fees. Metafilter is a forum which used to be very diverse in opinion and is now basically captured by a small vocal minority. How did they do this? The minority produced a large amount of content for the forum and was very active. 95% of that content was high quality and on topic but the remainder is biased and very opinionated. As a result of their interaction with the site they were closer to the mods, regarded more highly, given the benefit of the doubt in "bad actor" conversations. Now today Metafilter is a dying community of territorial users who eviscerate anyone who doesn't know how to play the game. The minority won and created their little clubhouse corner of the internet. Metafilter as a forum though is a shell of its former self. There are fundraisers to keep the site alive and formerly paid mods and devs are now either retired or do it for free. Not only did it drive away old and new users but the minority also seems to have become bored without constant drama and moved on (as seen by new posts and commenting activity falling of a cliff). I know the common refrain on HN and in general is "on a private platform there is no such thing as free speech" but be careful. Don't let blatantly toxic users run your platform but beware of users who are quick to call everything toxic.
        ativzzz 6y ago
        Every community has its rise and fall, and there is no one solution for all of them, but I still think without heavy moderation that fall comes much quicker and more violently.
  - erdrfgyhdbfg 6y ago
    So the Linus Torvalds quote about compiler masturbation is a no-go then. (posting from a throwaway to test your theory)
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - lain_ 6y ago
    https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&query=masturbation&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu... Though they very likely use dictionaries to find comments more frequently associated with undesired discussions since that should be more effective.
  - dang 6y ago
    Here's the list: masturb circlejerk faggot nigger feminazi shitstain lmgtfy.com #maga ...plus a bunch of spam sites. Why those words and not others? Shitstained if I know. These things tend to get added when somebody does something, and then stay there.
Goronmon 6y ago
Maybe if mods were more transparent across all the subs. This is a common refrain I've heard going back well before Reddit ever existed. I helped moderate the Vault Network boards for a while back when they were a thing. Its hard to overstate how amazingly...disturbed and vitriolic some of the individuals of a community can be. And dishonest. And spiteful. No amount of transparency helps when all it takes to refute any evidence is to label the mods as lying or "corrupt". Let's say a user says something bad and you mod the post and give them a warning. You tell them exactly what the offense was and why it was moderated. They might even act civil in response. Then you see later them talk about "X mod totally censored their post for no reason and refuses to explain why. X and the rest of the mods are totally corrupt". So, what do you do? Post a screenshot of the private messages exchanged (something, for instance, we weren't supposed to do)? Take a screenshot of a browser window with the "mod view" (aka. uncensored) of the original post? Something said user will point out can be easily edited because well, its a browser showing a website, not exactly hard to alter). And that happens every day, all the time constantly. And no one is being paid and there is a constant stream of other stuff you are trying to stay on top of. And sure, some of the mods are shitty and "corrupt" in a sense. But I would say its as much a reflection of the community itself as anything.
- syshum 6y ago
  While I am sure that occurs, I have been personally banned from several subreddits not for rules violations, or violence comments, but because the moderator simply disagreed with my comment or I was harsh in my commentary against the product the subreddit was about, for example a certain web browser subreddit banned me because I talked badly about a policy of that web browser I have much more experience in dealing with corrupt and biased mods than I see anything else
  - Goronmon 6y ago
    Just to provide the other side of this. Imagine seeing a post exactly like yours, literally word for word, with the same civil tone and all. Except the user in question had been banned for posting a tubgirl (its gross) image by a moderator that happened be female and had responded in private messages on a clear alt account (minutes after the ban with the same IP address) calling that moderator a slut who deserved to be raped and killed. And that style of interaction being relatively common.
eganist 6y ago
> Maybe if mods were more transparent across all the subs. We're (r/relationship_advice) rarely transparent with removal reasons. Our templatized removal reasons generally look something like this: > u/[user], please message the mods: > 1. to find out why this post was removed, and > 2. prior to posting any updates. > Thanks. or > User was banned for this [submission/comment]. The reason is because we have a high population of people who: 1. post too much information and expose themselves to doxxing risks, and 2. post fantasies that never happened. So in order to protect the people who inadvertently post too much information, we tend to remove these posts using the same generic removal template. However, if people know that the post was pulled for one of these two reasons, the submitter may still end up on the receiving end of harassment as a result, meaning we have to fuzz the possibility of the removal being for one of these two reasons by much more broadly withholding removal reasons. This is specific to r/relationship_advice. Other subreddits have other procedures.
jakelazaroff 6y ago
>>how meaninglessly violent people become when their posts are modded > Maybe if mods were more transparent across all the subs. Does the latter really justify the former? If you disagree with a moderation decision, take it up with them politely. If you consistently disagree, maybe this community just isn't for you! Mods are just people donating their time. Even if they're inconsistent or "corrupt", there's no reason you should respond in any way that can be described as "violent".
- as1mov 6y ago
  What if you take it up with them politely and this is their response? https://imgur.com/a/jhmGXzJ https://imgur.com/a/jhmGXzJ
  - jakelazaroff 6y ago
    Find or create another community. There are basically two scenarios here. One, a lot of people agree with you — in which case you should be able to appeal the decision or splinter off successfully. Two, most people disagree with you — in which case the mod is probably right, or at the very least you're simply not welcome in the community. Let's also not forget that we're talking about violence in response to moderation decisions. So even if that's their response, it's still not okay to e.g. threaten them.
    - as1mov 6y ago
      The problem with the first suggestion is the fact that the moderator in the above screenshot mods 1000+ subreddits. You can be pretty sure they mod the other subreddits too with the same mindset, how many of them do you recreate? This is the whole problem that has caused the drama in the past few days. > Let's also not forget that we're talking about violence in response to moderation decisions. So even if that's their response, it's still not okay to e.g. threaten them. Agreed.
- haunter 6y ago
  > If you consistently disagree, maybe this community just isn't for you! Ah the classic "don't let others make changes but outcast them" approach.

Someone1234 6y ago

> Maybe if mods were more transparent across all the subs. Don't get me started. Particularly "muting" posts with auto-moderator (silently hiding them for others without notification/warning/explanation). It was originally created for spam control but is regularly abused for generic moderation. It needs more controls placed on it. To give a recent example, I wrote a long reply in /r/fitness's daily discussion but it was muted because it contained an offhand remark about COVID-19 (vis-a-vis getting hold of fitness equipment right now). Why are they muting all comments that contain "COVID?" Who even knows, but the /way/ it was done was pretty irksome and resulted in wasted effort on my part for a comment that violated zero published rules or etiquette. /r/politics has a huge dictionary of phases and idioms that result in auto muting. None of which are defined in their rules.

teddyh 6y ago
> /r/politics has a huge dictionary of phases and idioms that result in auto muting. None of which are defined in their rules. This is true here on HN too. One such word that I’ve seen to cause comments get auto-killed is “m∗sturbation” (censored for obvious reasons), and I am sure there are others.
- syshum 6y ago
  Plenty of people complain about overmoderation here on HN as well... I am one of those people
  - ativzzz 6y ago
    I firmly believe that the only way an online forum, particularly an anonymous one with free signups can remain relatively civil is very heavy handed moderation. This is not a free speech zone (it's a privately owned space), and the only way to prevent bad actors is to be very liberal in applying heavy moderation. If a few "medium" actors get banned by accident, that's the price to pay for the rest of us getting to enjoy discussing tech without dealing with a toxic cesspool.
    - verylittlemeat 6y ago
      I strongly disagree. Bad actors thrive just as well if not better in places with moderation and even sign up fees. Metafilter is a forum which used to be very diverse in opinion and is now basically captured by a small vocal minority. How did they do this? The minority produced a large amount of content for the forum and was very active. 95% of that content was high quality and on topic but the remainder is biased and very opinionated. As a result of their interaction with the site they were closer to the mods, regarded more highly, given the benefit of the doubt in "bad actor" conversations. Now today Metafilter is a dying community of territorial users who eviscerate anyone who doesn't know how to play the game. The minority won and created their little clubhouse corner of the internet. Metafilter as a forum though is a shell of its former self. There are fundraisers to keep the site alive and formerly paid mods and devs are now either retired or do it for free. Not only did it drive away old and new users but the minority also seems to have become bored without constant drama and moved on (as seen by new posts and commenting activity falling of a cliff). I know the common refrain on HN and in general is "on a private platform there is no such thing as free speech" but be careful. Don't let blatantly toxic users run your platform but beware of users who are quick to call everything toxic.
      - ativzzz 6y ago
        Every community has its rise and fall, and there is no one solution for all of them, but I still think without heavy moderation that fall comes much quicker and more violently.
- erdrfgyhdbfg 6y ago
  So the Linus Torvalds quote about compiler masturbation is a no-go then. (posting from a throwaway to test your theory)
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- lain_ 6y ago
  https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&query=masturbation&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu... Though they very likely use dictionaries to find comments more frequently associated with undesired discussions since that should be more effective.
- dang 6y ago
  Here's the list: masturb circlejerk faggot nigger feminazi shitstain lmgtfy.com #maga ...plus a bunch of spam sites. Why those words and not others? Shitstained if I know. These things tend to get added when somebody does something, and then stay there.

Goronmon 6y ago

Maybe if mods were more transparent across all the subs. This is a common refrain I've heard going back well before Reddit ever existed. I helped moderate the Vault Network boards for a while back when they were a thing. Its hard to overstate how amazingly...disturbed and vitriolic some of the individuals of a community can be. And dishonest. And spiteful. No amount of transparency helps when all it takes to refute any evidence is to label the mods as lying or "corrupt". Let's say a user says something bad and you mod the post and give them a warning. You tell them exactly what the offense was and why it was moderated. They might even act civil in response. Then you see later them talk about "X mod totally censored their post for no reason and refuses to explain why. X and the rest of the mods are totally corrupt". So, what do you do? Post a screenshot of the private messages exchanged (something, for instance, we weren't supposed to do)? Take a screenshot of a browser window with the "mod view" (aka. uncensored) of the original post? Something said user will point out can be easily edited because well, its a browser showing a website, not exactly hard to alter). And that happens every day, all the time constantly. And no one is being paid and there is a constant stream of other stuff you are trying to stay on top of. And sure, some of the mods are shitty and "corrupt" in a sense. But I would say its as much a reflection of the community itself as anything.

syshum 6y ago
While I am sure that occurs, I have been personally banned from several subreddits not for rules violations, or violence comments, but because the moderator simply disagreed with my comment or I was harsh in my commentary against the product the subreddit was about, for example a certain web browser subreddit banned me because I talked badly about a policy of that web browser I have much more experience in dealing with corrupt and biased mods than I see anything else
- Goronmon 6y ago
  Just to provide the other side of this. Imagine seeing a post exactly like yours, literally word for word, with the same civil tone and all. Except the user in question had been banned for posting a tubgirl (its gross) image by a moderator that happened be female and had responded in private messages on a clear alt account (minutes after the ban with the same IP address) calling that moderator a slut who deserved to be raped and killed. And that style of interaction being relatively common.

eganist 6y ago

> Maybe if mods were more transparent across all the subs. We're (r/relationship_advice) rarely transparent with removal reasons. Our templatized removal reasons generally look something like this: > u/[user], please message the mods: > 1. to find out why this post was removed, and > 2. prior to posting any updates. > Thanks. or > User was banned for this [submission/comment]. The reason is because we have a high population of people who: 1. post too much information and expose themselves to doxxing risks, and 2. post fantasies that never happened. So in order to protect the people who inadvertently post too much information, we tend to remove these posts using the same generic removal template. However, if people know that the post was pulled for one of these two reasons, the submitter may still end up on the receiving end of harassment as a result, meaning we have to fuzz the possibility of the removal being for one of these two reasons by much more broadly withholding removal reasons. This is specific to r/relationship_advice. Other subreddits have other procedures.

jakelazaroff 6y ago

>>how meaninglessly violent people become when their posts are modded > Maybe if mods were more transparent across all the subs. Does the latter really justify the former? If you disagree with a moderation decision, take it up with them politely. If you consistently disagree, maybe this community just isn't for you! Mods are just people donating their time. Even if they're inconsistent or "corrupt", there's no reason you should respond in any way that can be described as "violent".

as1mov 6y ago
What if you take it up with them politely and this is their response? https://imgur.com/a/jhmGXzJ https://imgur.com/a/jhmGXzJ
- jakelazaroff 6y ago
  Find or create another community. There are basically two scenarios here. One, a lot of people agree with you — in which case you should be able to appeal the decision or splinter off successfully. Two, most people disagree with you — in which case the mod is probably right, or at the very least you're simply not welcome in the community. Let's also not forget that we're talking about violence in response to moderation decisions. So even if that's their response, it's still not okay to e.g. threaten them.
  - as1mov 6y ago
    The problem with the first suggestion is the fact that the moderator in the above screenshot mods 1000+ subreddits. You can be pretty sure they mod the other subreddits too with the same mindset, how many of them do you recreate? This is the whole problem that has caused the drama in the past few days. > Let's also not forget that we're talking about violence in response to moderation decisions. So even if that's their response, it's still not okay to e.g. threaten them. Agreed.
haunter 6y ago
> If you consistently disagree, maybe this community just isn't for you! Ah the classic "don't let others make changes but outcast them" approach.