3 ms·

I'm not saying I agree with the parent commenter. But their point was not that they didn't want to see profanity, it was that they don't want to see anything at

I'm not saying I agree with the parent commenter. But their point was not that they didn't want to see profanity, it was that they don't want to see anything at all from the type of people that use profanity. If that's you're position then shadow banning works well, whereas getting them to post reviews with profanity taken out does not.

Arnavion 4y ago
And I'm saying that the profanity was not the only problem that caused the review to be shadow-filtered. Regardless of whether the system filters profanity or not, the fact that it filters them while pretending otherwise is the problem. If one supports the system that shadow-filters profanity, they're also supporting the system that shadow-filters "some other unidentified thing that seems perfectly fine", and thus leads to them not seeing reviews that contained useful information. You think I can't write a review without profanity? Of course I can. I can be extremely polite while pointing out the issues I had with the business. That's exactly what I did when I realized this was happening. I just didn't know I was going to be held to that standard when I posted the review, and the system lied to me that what I wrote was acceptable so I had no reason to believe otherwise. If you were relying on not reading reviews like mine because my use of profanity implied I was a jerk, well I'm sorry but your heuristic isn't going to work any more because I know now. It wasn't even hard for me to figure out, so I'm sure most of the jerks have figured it out too. So sorry if you were relying on that, but you probably can't any more.
- Etherlord87 4y ago
  Shadow-anything seems wrong. But the argument here is: "I don't want to see the reviews made by people who are vulgar" with the implied "I also don't want the system to ask them to remove profanity and post again, because I still think the review won't be useful to me". The heuristic reasoning being: a review is of low value if it's written by someone who's default attitude is vulgar, regardless if that person is willing to correct self when requested. The discriminator being: If a review has profanity initially, don't display it even if the review is improved. Also don't display other reviews by that person. Not something I agree with, but it seems that's what user esperent meant. > If you were relying on not reading reviews like mine because my use of profanity implied I was a jerk, well I'm sorry but your heuristic isn't going to work any more because I know now. It wasn't even hard for me to figure out, so I'm sure most of the jerks have figured it out too. So sorry if you were relying on that, but you probably can't any more. And that's the idea behind shadow banning - the banned person is supposed to never become aware of the ban.
  - dingleberry420 4y ago
    Don't pretend you've never been vulgar when upset. The most valuable reviews are those that are honest.
    - Etherlord87 4y ago
      > Not something I agree with[...]

Arnavion 4y ago

And I'm saying that the profanity was not the only problem that caused the review to be shadow-filtered. Regardless of whether the system filters profanity or not, the fact that it filters them while pretending otherwise is the problem. If one supports the system that shadow-filters profanity, they're also supporting the system that shadow-filters "some other unidentified thing that seems perfectly fine", and thus leads to them not seeing reviews that contained useful information. You think I can't write a review without profanity? Of course I can. I can be extremely polite while pointing out the issues I had with the business. That's exactly what I did when I realized this was happening. I just didn't know I was going to be held to that standard when I posted the review, and the system lied to me that what I wrote was acceptable so I had no reason to believe otherwise. If you were relying on not reading reviews like mine because my use of profanity implied I was a jerk, well I'm sorry but your heuristic isn't going to work any more because I know now. It wasn't even hard for me to figure out, so I'm sure most of the jerks have figured it out too. So sorry if you were relying on that, but you probably can't any more.

Etherlord87 4y ago
Shadow-anything seems wrong. But the argument here is: "I don't want to see the reviews made by people who are vulgar" with the implied "I also don't want the system to ask them to remove profanity and post again, because I still think the review won't be useful to me". The heuristic reasoning being: a review is of low value if it's written by someone who's default attitude is vulgar, regardless if that person is willing to correct self when requested. The discriminator being: If a review has profanity initially, don't display it even if the review is improved. Also don't display other reviews by that person. Not something I agree with, but it seems that's what user esperent meant. > If you were relying on not reading reviews like mine because my use of profanity implied I was a jerk, well I'm sorry but your heuristic isn't going to work any more because I know now. It wasn't even hard for me to figure out, so I'm sure most of the jerks have figured it out too. So sorry if you were relying on that, but you probably can't any more. And that's the idea behind shadow banning - the banned person is supposed to never become aware of the ban.
- dingleberry420 4y ago
  Don't pretend you've never been vulgar when upset. The most valuable reviews are those that are honest.
  - Etherlord87 4y ago
    > Not something I agree with[...]