3 ms·

It seems likely that this is true. But couldn't you get to the same end-result by having good intentions but a bad moderation system? (e.g. I want to keep Naz

It seems likely that this is true. But couldn't you get to the same end-result by having good intentions but a bad moderation system? (e.g. I want to keep Nazi content off my service so I subject all posts to a review by 5 other users. That might work until you get a bunch of Nazis that suddenly sign up up-vote each other's content). Not every new service can afford to moderate things like "FB or Twitter". And this is an important risk to account for.

TeaDrunk 6y ago
You should be able to identify that a nazi takeover is happening and change your moderation systems accordingly. Any product person who is claiming to own the product should have eagle eyes on how their product is working or not working.
jlkuester7 6y ago
To clarify, I believe that if you don't think you can adequately moderate your service, then you should absolutely not be running it. If your venders do not think you are doing a good enough job moderating your service, then they should not be forced to do business with you. All I am trying to say is that it is important to realize that how you moderate your service may very well be judged by your venders and you could have a bad time if they find it lacking....
- esja 6y ago
  By that standard Twitter should be in a lot of trouble as well. And probably Facebook too.
lokar 6y ago
But, AIUI, this content has been "slipping through" their moderation for a long time (and getting worse) and they did nothing. So, infective moderation combined with apparent indifference.
- jlkuester7 6y ago
  Right I am not disagreeing with this at all. I am just trying to say that "infective moderation combined with apparent indifference" seems less extreme than DailyStormer-style intentional promotion of violent content. There is still a long ways to go from "infective moderation combined with apparent indifference" to "effective moderation" or even to "infective moderation that we are attempting to fix". But somewhere between "apparent indifference" and "attempting to fix" is a nasty grey area that you don't want to be caught in.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
mcguire 6y ago
I would bet that any legal standard would involve phrases like "good faith attempt" and "standard of practice". (If you find a circle of Nazis up-voting each other, you'll have to think up a new moderation scheme.) FaceBook and Twitter are decent examples---their moderation systems are pretty hit-or-miss, assuming good faith.
ncallaway 6y ago
> Not every new service can afford to moderate things like "FB or Twitter". And this is an important risk to account for. If you're planning on starting a service built around user generated content, you should have an answer for how you plan on moderating content. If you don't have a plan for how to address illegal uses of your service (fraud, child pornography, etc), then you run the risk of being shut down. This isn't even a question of "is it or isn't it incitement". If you want to run on a hosting platform that exists as a business unit anywhere in the United States, if you don't have a plan for moderating at least the most harmful illegal content, you are at risk of being shut down. FOSTA and SESTA make clear that the the service providers and hosting platforms bear some legal liability for this content, and they will shut you down if you don't moderate your platform.

TeaDrunk 6y ago

You should be able to identify that a nazi takeover is happening and change your moderation systems accordingly. Any product person who is claiming to own the product should have eagle eyes on how their product is working or not working.

jlkuester7 6y ago

To clarify, I believe that if you don't think you can adequately moderate your service, then you should absolutely not be running it. If your venders do not think you are doing a good enough job moderating your service, then they should not be forced to do business with you. All I am trying to say is that it is important to realize that how you moderate your service may very well be judged by your venders and you could have a bad time if they find it lacking....

esja 6y ago
By that standard Twitter should be in a lot of trouble as well. And probably Facebook too.

lokar 6y ago

But, AIUI, this content has been "slipping through" their moderation for a long time (and getting worse) and they did nothing. So, infective moderation combined with apparent indifference.

jlkuester7 6y ago
Right I am not disagreeing with this at all. I am just trying to say that "infective moderation combined with apparent indifference" seems less extreme than DailyStormer-style intentional promotion of violent content. There is still a long ways to go from "infective moderation combined with apparent indifference" to "effective moderation" or even to "infective moderation that we are attempting to fix". But somewhere between "apparent indifference" and "attempting to fix" is a nasty grey area that you don't want to be caught in.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

mcguire 6y ago

I would bet that any legal standard would involve phrases like "good faith attempt" and "standard of practice". (If you find a circle of Nazis up-voting each other, you'll have to think up a new moderation scheme.) FaceBook and Twitter are decent examples---their moderation systems are pretty hit-or-miss, assuming good faith.

ncallaway 6y ago

> Not every new service can afford to moderate things like "FB or Twitter". And this is an important risk to account for. If you're planning on starting a service built around user generated content, you should have an answer for how you plan on moderating content. If you don't have a plan for how to address illegal uses of your service (fraud, child pornography, etc), then you run the risk of being shut down. This isn't even a question of "is it or isn't it incitement". If you want to run on a hosting platform that exists as a business unit anywhere in the United States, if you don't have a plan for moderating at least the most harmful illegal content, you are at risk of being shut down. FOSTA and SESTA make clear that the the service providers and hosting platforms bear some legal liability for this content, and they will shut you down if you don't moderate your platform.