5 ms·

I think things are pretty clear cut, if you want to start a service to obviously harbor fascist user-driven content, then yes, prepare to be cut off from the ma

by yks 6y ago

I think things are pretty clear cut, if you want to start a service to obviously harbor fascist user-driven content, then yes, prepare to be cut off from the mainstream vendors. DailyStormer and Parler are explicitly those types of services. It is a bit disingenuous to suggest that because Parler is down, "mom and pop" websites with comment section attached now need to lawyer up.

jlkuester7 6y ago
> It is a bit disingenuous to suggest that because Parler is down, "mom and pop" websites with comment section attached now need to lawyer up. This is definitely a straw-man, but at the same time, if your website hosts user-supplied content and you don't have a rock-solid strategy for moderating it, then yeah you probably should be worried. (Though the spammers will probably take down your site long before AWS...)
- tlholaday 6y ago
  No, the lesson of Parler is not that you need to have > ... a rock-solid strategy for moderating ... The lesson is you need to have a rock-solid `policy` that content which advocates violence is impermissible.
  - jlkuester7 6y ago
    Unfortunately I cannot reference Parlor's actual Community Guidelines (https://legal.parler.com/documents/guidelines.pdf https://legal.parler.com/documents/guidelines.pdf) since the site is down for some reason. :) However, based on what is described here (https://theconversation.com/parler-what-you-need-to-know-about-the-free-speech-twitter-alternative-142268 https://theconversation.com/parler-what-you-need-to-know-abo...) `there are policies against “fighting words” and “threats of harm”. This includes “a threat of or advocating for violation against an individual or group”.` Based on recent examples of Parlor posts it seems like the Parlor moderators were not adequately enforcing this policy.
    - threeseed 6y ago
      Pretty sure Parlor had no official moderators. Just the community self-moderating themselves.
- rirarobo 6y ago
  I disagree, you don't need a "rock-solid strategy for moderating" "user-supplied content", you just need a user base that is by and large not inciting violence, particularly against government officials. If I run some hobbyist forum where say 1 in 1000 users is posting hate speech or calling for violence, as long as I have less-than-rock-solid moderation that can clean up some of their posts and ban the worst offenders based on user reports, I wouldn't be too worried. It's also in my interest to keep the community healthy. Now, if 20% or 50% of my users are posting hate speech and calling for violence, yeah I would be worried, but I would be less worried about moderation, and more worried about why my hobby attracts extremists. Might call for some self reflection.
  - jlkuester7 6y ago
    It sounds like you have done your risk analysis and settled on an balance of risk and moderation effort that is acceptable to you. That sounds fair to me. > Now, if 20% or 50% of my users are posting hate speech and calling for violence, yeah I would be worried, but I would be less worried about moderation, and more worried about why my hobby attracts extremists. Might call for some self reflection. LOL! I think this is actually the right take! Definitely also applies to your social network...
  - b0bb1z3r0 6y ago
    winning argument right here
  - user22 6y ago
    Just a thought.... Maybe it doesn't attract extremists. Maybe extremists just happened to randomly pick your site as the latest site to use for communication. Just theorizing here, but assume that instead of hosting their own content, web sites with comments are hijacked to host extremists propaganda/plans/violent event, with a pointer to the next web site to use (not IF) but when the current one gets shut down. The only way to avoid this is to moderate the comments before they are allowed to be displayed. And I'm betting there are a thousand+ web sites that are run by amateurs where this is the last thing on their minds. Hopefully the fact that scaling and searching would be impossible makes this a non-issue.
- mcguire 6y ago
  "a rock-solid strategy for moderating it" You mean, like Facebook and Twitter?
CountDrewku 6y ago
Twitter literally allows dictators to use their service so your point is moot. There’s a massive double standard being applied. Additionally, the term fascist is used for essentially anything people dislike anymore so forgive if your subjective take or big tech’s take on fascism doesn’t mean a damn thing to me. https://slate.com/technology/2021/01/twitter-trump-dictators-iran-china.html https://slate.com/technology/2021/01/twitter-trump-dictators...

by yks 6y ago

jlkuester7 6y ago

> It is a bit disingenuous to suggest that because Parler is down, "mom and pop" websites with comment section attached now need to lawyer up. This is definitely a straw-man, but at the same time, if your website hosts user-supplied content and you don't have a rock-solid strategy for moderating it, then yeah you probably should be worried. (Though the spammers will probably take down your site long before AWS...)

tlholaday 6y ago
No, the lesson of Parler is not that you need to have > ... a rock-solid strategy for moderating ... The lesson is you need to have a rock-solid `policy` that content which advocates violence is impermissible.
- jlkuester7 6y ago
  Unfortunately I cannot reference Parlor's actual Community Guidelines (https://legal.parler.com/documents/guidelines.pdf https://legal.parler.com/documents/guidelines.pdf) since the site is down for some reason. :) However, based on what is described here (https://theconversation.com/parler-what-you-need-to-know-about-the-free-speech-twitter-alternative-142268 https://theconversation.com/parler-what-you-need-to-know-abo...) `there are policies against “fighting words” and “threats of harm”. This includes “a threat of or advocating for violation against an individual or group”.` Based on recent examples of Parlor posts it seems like the Parlor moderators were not adequately enforcing this policy.
  - threeseed 6y ago
    Pretty sure Parlor had no official moderators. Just the community self-moderating themselves.
rirarobo 6y ago
I disagree, you don't need a "rock-solid strategy for moderating" "user-supplied content", you just need a user base that is by and large not inciting violence, particularly against government officials. If I run some hobbyist forum where say 1 in 1000 users is posting hate speech or calling for violence, as long as I have less-than-rock-solid moderation that can clean up some of their posts and ban the worst offenders based on user reports, I wouldn't be too worried. It's also in my interest to keep the community healthy. Now, if 20% or 50% of my users are posting hate speech and calling for violence, yeah I would be worried, but I would be less worried about moderation, and more worried about why my hobby attracts extremists. Might call for some self reflection.
- jlkuester7 6y ago
  It sounds like you have done your risk analysis and settled on an balance of risk and moderation effort that is acceptable to you. That sounds fair to me. > Now, if 20% or 50% of my users are posting hate speech and calling for violence, yeah I would be worried, but I would be less worried about moderation, and more worried about why my hobby attracts extremists. Might call for some self reflection. LOL! I think this is actually the right take! Definitely also applies to your social network...
- b0bb1z3r0 6y ago
  winning argument right here
- user22 6y ago
  Just a thought.... Maybe it doesn't attract extremists. Maybe extremists just happened to randomly pick your site as the latest site to use for communication. Just theorizing here, but assume that instead of hosting their own content, web sites with comments are hijacked to host extremists propaganda/plans/violent event, with a pointer to the next web site to use (not IF) but when the current one gets shut down. The only way to avoid this is to moderate the comments before they are allowed to be displayed. And I'm betting there are a thousand+ web sites that are run by amateurs where this is the last thing on their minds. Hopefully the fact that scaling and searching would be impossible makes this a non-issue.
mcguire 6y ago
"a rock-solid strategy for moderating it" You mean, like Facebook and Twitter?

CountDrewku 6y ago

Twitter literally allows dictators to use their service so your point is moot. There’s a massive double standard being applied. Additionally, the term fascist is used for essentially anything people dislike anymore so forgive if your subjective take or big tech’s take on fascism doesn’t mean a damn thing to me. https://slate.com/technology/2021/01/twitter-trump-dictators-iran-china.html https://slate.com/technology/2021/01/twitter-trump-dictators...