3 ms·

What if it's members are secretly 70% shills and bots, and the community itself is somewhat of an illusion

by spywaregorilla 5y ago

int_19h 5y ago
Then the remaining 30% should probably just go elsewhere?
- spywaregorilla 5y ago
  But how would you know? What if you're looking for a new community and the one you find is already compromised but from all outsider views seems to be a healthy source of expertise on a topic?
  - int_19h 5y ago
    I find it very doubtful that a community that's mostly bots would "seem to be a healthy source of expertise" from the outside. If you're only looking at the materials that the community itself publishes (i.e. group description etc) - then sure, but that's not doing one's due diligence. But even if you can't see it from the outside, it's not like it's a one-way door. Regardless, what do you suggest as a remediation? By definition, if it looks good to the outsiders, how could the outsiders meaningfully moderate it?
    - spywaregorilla 5y ago
      >I find it very doubtful that a community that's mostly bots would "seem to be a healthy source of expertise" from the outside. If you're only looking at the materials that the community itself publishes (i.e. group description etc) - then sure, but that's not doing one's due diligence. What about one human and 100 bot slaves that help his content gain the appearance of social agreement and importance? I also think the bar for the appearance of expertise is basically nothing if you're new to the area. I'm a fan of removing anonymity from sufficiently large platforms personally.
      - int_19h 5y ago
        There are many hypothetical scenarios that can be cherry-picked. And many not-so-hypothetical ones - e.g. trans people getting harassed on Facebook, today, due to its "real name" policy. Besides I don't see how you'd meaningfully implement it in the first place - i.e. how would you distinguish bots from actual people? Require ID? Surely you can see the potential for abuse inherent in that. Especially outside of liberal democracies (although they are by no means immune to that, either).

What if it's members are secretly 70% shills and bots, and the community itself is somewhat of an illusion

int_19h 5y ago

Then the remaining 30% should probably just go elsewhere?

spywaregorilla 5y ago
But how would you know? What if you're looking for a new community and the one you find is already compromised but from all outsider views seems to be a healthy source of expertise on a topic?
- int_19h 5y ago
  I find it very doubtful that a community that's mostly bots would "seem to be a healthy source of expertise" from the outside. If you're only looking at the materials that the community itself publishes (i.e. group description etc) - then sure, but that's not doing one's due diligence. But even if you can't see it from the outside, it's not like it's a one-way door. Regardless, what do you suggest as a remediation? By definition, if it looks good to the outsiders, how could the outsiders meaningfully moderate it?
  - spywaregorilla 5y ago
    >I find it very doubtful that a community that's mostly bots would "seem to be a healthy source of expertise" from the outside. If you're only looking at the materials that the community itself publishes (i.e. group description etc) - then sure, but that's not doing one's due diligence. What about one human and 100 bot slaves that help his content gain the appearance of social agreement and importance? I also think the bar for the appearance of expertise is basically nothing if you're new to the area. I'm a fan of removing anonymity from sufficiently large platforms personally.
    - int_19h 5y ago
      There are many hypothetical scenarios that can be cherry-picked. And many not-so-hypothetical ones - e.g. trans people getting harassed on Facebook, today, due to its "real name" policy. Besides I don't see how you'd meaningfully implement it in the first place - i.e. how would you distinguish bots from actual people? Require ID? Surely you can see the potential for abuse inherent in that. Especially outside of liberal democracies (although they are by no means immune to that, either).