5 ms·

Are we able to see public video (or transcripts) of the discussion that lead to this decision, or are we only given the decision? Not that I would expect any ac

Are we able to see public video (or transcripts) of the discussion that lead to this decision, or are we only given the decision? Not that I would expect any actual transparency from Facebook...

toomuchtodo 5y ago
Why would Facebook, as a private entity, be required to provide such? Airlines aren’t required to provide similar when they ban a customer from flying, nor corporations when they ban a patron from their stores (for whatever reason).
- aestetix 5y ago
  I never said they were.
  - toomuchtodo 5y ago
    It seemed like you were looking for transparency that they aren’t obligated or required by law or regulation to provide, hence my comparisons.
    - username90 5y ago
      Why does the law matter in this discussion? They just wondered whether there were any public transcripts, didn't bring up any laws at all.
      - toomuchtodo 5y ago
        Do companies make their discussions or adjudications public without the law requiring them to? I have never heard of this, even with Bridgewater (who records everything internally). Trying to understand where someone’s expectation comes from.
        username90 5y ago
        This decision wasn't made by a company, it was made by an "independent" oversight board. You could expect such an organization to be more transparent to show that they truly are independent.
- hiq 5y ago
  > Why would Facebook, as a private entity, be required to provide such? OP didn't say that Facebook is required to do that. Note that Facebook is also not required to have an oversight board or anything similar.
- AbrahamParangi 5y ago
  I think the argument that corporate rights are unassailable when it comes to censoring people from monopoly or near-monopoly platforms is a little disingenuous. I don’t mean that you can’t make the argument, I’m just not sure it’s a thing that anyone but the staunchest free-marketeers actually believes.
  - toomuchtodo 5y ago
    I’m actually very left leaning and pro regulation and making this argument. Without any law or regulatory requirement, platforms will not do this willingly.
    - shkkmo 5y ago
      It sounds like you are arguing that we shouldn't pass a law requiring transparency (and providing some legal recourse) in decisions to deny access to public products/services by dominant companies I suspect you meant to just point out that until such a law is passed, we are unlikely to see transparency.
      - toomuchtodo 5y ago
        Correct.
- elliekelly 5y ago
  Counterpoint: the board is supposedly “independent” from Facebook so Facebook’s feelings on transparency are, theoretically, irrelevant and the board is, theoretically, free to disclose minutes, discussion, etc. Of course, over here in reality, the word “independent” is quite a bit of a stretch. I give it about as much weight as Facebook’s claims they “value user privacy”.

Are we able to see public video (or transcripts) of the discussion that lead to this decision, or are we only given the decision? Not that I would expect any actual transparency from Facebook...

toomuchtodo 5y ago

Why would Facebook, as a private entity, be required to provide such? Airlines aren’t required to provide similar when they ban a customer from flying, nor corporations when they ban a patron from their stores (for whatever reason).

aestetix 5y ago
I never said they were.
- toomuchtodo 5y ago
  It seemed like you were looking for transparency that they aren’t obligated or required by law or regulation to provide, hence my comparisons.
  - username90 5y ago
    Why does the law matter in this discussion? They just wondered whether there were any public transcripts, didn't bring up any laws at all.
    - toomuchtodo 5y ago
      Do companies make their discussions or adjudications public without the law requiring them to? I have never heard of this, even with Bridgewater (who records everything internally). Trying to understand where someone’s expectation comes from.
      - username90 5y ago
        This decision wasn't made by a company, it was made by an "independent" oversight board. You could expect such an organization to be more transparent to show that they truly are independent.
hiq 5y ago
> Why would Facebook, as a private entity, be required to provide such? OP didn't say that Facebook is required to do that. Note that Facebook is also not required to have an oversight board or anything similar.
AbrahamParangi 5y ago
I think the argument that corporate rights are unassailable when it comes to censoring people from monopoly or near-monopoly platforms is a little disingenuous. I don’t mean that you can’t make the argument, I’m just not sure it’s a thing that anyone but the staunchest free-marketeers actually believes.
- toomuchtodo 5y ago
  I’m actually very left leaning and pro regulation and making this argument. Without any law or regulatory requirement, platforms will not do this willingly.
  - shkkmo 5y ago
    It sounds like you are arguing that we shouldn't pass a law requiring transparency (and providing some legal recourse) in decisions to deny access to public products/services by dominant companies I suspect you meant to just point out that until such a law is passed, we are unlikely to see transparency.
    - toomuchtodo 5y ago
      Correct.
elliekelly 5y ago
Counterpoint: the board is supposedly “independent” from Facebook so Facebook’s feelings on transparency are, theoretically, irrelevant and the board is, theoretically, free to disclose minutes, discussion, etc. Of course, over here in reality, the word “independent” is quite a bit of a stretch. I give it about as much weight as Facebook’s claims they “value user privacy”.