2 ms·

You're still falling into the identity trap. Speaker. Listener. Medium. Message. That's it. Anything else is a control mechanism layered on top. Moderation is

You're still falling into the identity trap. Speaker. Listener. Medium. Message. That's it. Anything else is a control mechanism layered on top. Moderation is not necessary to communication. Rather, it is necessary to facilitate some kinds of communication over others, and the concept of identity makes that a far easier and more effective a lever to apply to facilitated signal amplification. It all comes back to the age old question at the heart of net neutrality: dumb tubes, or marketplace of traffic valuation through optimization and classification of traffic provenance. One necessarily excludes the other. Both have rather undesirable failure states. Dumb pipes means hello spam. The other side means hello memory holing and censorship. In the end, you can survive the spam with enough patience and filtering. You can't survive malicious pruning or preemptive packet drop. The information either propagates, or it doesn't. I'd say there is greater utility overall in info propagating than not. Even for the most abhorrent types of info. You at least know of the horror out there, and that you need to investigate if the info propagates. If the signal never propagates, you'll never know there is a problem. The act of separating Signal from Noise is the Essence of the Art.

dragontamer 5y ago
> Moderation is not necessary to communication. Every generation, I've seen this assertion. And every generation, it is tested and immediately fails. Usenet had unmoderated channels. The better ones were moderated. GameFAQs had LUE (post anything, life, universe and everything), but the memes / board invasions spread so much that GameFAQs was forced to shut it down. (Especially when said "memes" was posting sexually explicit images to children game boards) 4chan was mostly unmoderated. But Gamergate happened and the moderators decided to ban doxing and gamergate politics, so 8chan happened. 8chan became an ally of Gamergate and championed free speech. but then doxing and swatting got too serious, so the mods started banning people. -------- If you make an unmoderated channel today, you're immediately going to draw in the filthiest individuals: the ones who want to swat and dox for fun. The "trolling community" is always looking for new hosts, because they keep getting banned from legitimate circles. To control the doxers and swatters, you need to ban them from your server. This requires an identity protocol (NickServ, or some other username mechanism). That way, you ban the ones who keep doxing / swatting, and keep the rest of the crowd.

dragontamer 5y ago

> Moderation is not necessary to communication. Every generation, I've seen this assertion. And every generation, it is tested and immediately fails. Usenet had unmoderated channels. The better ones were moderated. GameFAQs had LUE (post anything, life, universe and everything), but the memes / board invasions spread so much that GameFAQs was forced to shut it down. (Especially when said "memes" was posting sexually explicit images to children game boards) 4chan was mostly unmoderated. But Gamergate happened and the moderators decided to ban doxing and gamergate politics, so 8chan happened. 8chan became an ally of Gamergate and championed free speech. but then doxing and swatting got too serious, so the mods started banning people. -------- If you make an unmoderated channel today, you're immediately going to draw in the filthiest individuals: the ones who want to swat and dox for fun. The "trolling community" is always looking for new hosts, because they keep getting banned from legitimate circles. To control the doxers and swatters, you need to ban them from your server. This requires an identity protocol (NickServ, or some other username mechanism). That way, you ban the ones who keep doxing / swatting, and keep the rest of the crowd.