13 ms·

Show HN: Reveddit.com: Improving online discourse with transparent moderation

180 points by rhaksw 4y ago

Hi HN, this talk represents a summary of my work over the last four years on addressing shadow moderation with Reveddit. Let me know what you think, good or bad, and I'll do my best to answer. What is shadow moderation? It is any action taken against your content that you aren't told about and aren't able to detect while logged in. I focus on Reddit comments since every single removal is shadow removed— removed comments are shown to you as if they're not. You can try this for yourself on, https://www.reveddit.com https://www.reveddit.com https://www.reddit.com/r/CantSayAnything/about/sticky/ https://www.reddit.com/r/CantSayAnything/about/sticky/ Your content will be removed, you won't be told, and it will be shown to you as if it's publicly visible.

beefman 4y ago
Just tested this on my 15-year-old account and it's really well executed. Great work! The main link here should be to reveddit, not the video at cantsayanything as it is now.
- rhaksw 4y ago
  > Just tested this on my 15-year-old account and it's really well executed. Great work! Thanks! > The main link here should be to reveddit, not the video at cantsayanything as it is now. I intended to share the video because it's an overview of what I've learned while building the site, which I thought might engender more interesting discussion than the tool itself. TL;DW I think secret removals creates the toxicity it seeks to remove. See also this ongoing discussion: https://www.reddit.com/r/TheoryOfReddit/comments/ymeqaz/hate_on_reddit_a_global_lists_of_toxic_users/iv4aet6/ https://www.reddit.com/r/TheoryOfReddit/comments/ymeqaz/hate...
  - beefman 4y ago
    For Show HN, it's customary to link directly to the product. I agree about secret removals.
    - rhaksw 4y ago
      I see. I don't see a specific mention about the link itself in the rules for Show HN. I also think customs are less fixed than rules and don't need to be moderated. https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html
dmix 4y ago
I love reveddit.com, it's hilarious to look at the typical r/science post and see 60%+ of comments removed on average (the 'controversial' ones go 75%+). If the moderators agree with the study there is zero dissent tolerated. This subreddit has something like 1000+ moderators and they remove any comments that doesn't fit into Reddit's very narrowly defined overton window. Not just people being off-topic or taboo... but often anyone who questions the studies being posted. My only critique is that it doesn't work with Firefox. I have to pull up Chrome which I only use for work. Do you have a social media profile to follow/provide feedback to?
- rhaksw 4y ago
  > I love reveddit.com, it's hilarious to look at the typical r/science post and see 60%+ of comments removed on average (the 'controversial' ones go 75%+). Yeah I mention r/science at 7:00 in the linked video. > If the moderators agree with the study there is zero dissent tolerated. This subreddit has something like 1000+ moderators and they remove any comments that doesn't fit into Reddit's very narrowly defined overton window. Not just people being off-topic or taboo... but often anyone who questions the studies being posted. I'm sure that's true. I haven't looked at the exact biases in that group too much. For awhile I was collecting examples of biased removals in certain groups, but that was just so I could come up with relatable stories to tell. I disagree with pretty much every secretive removal. Even in cases where someone is threatening violence I wonder whether we should keep such a removal secret from the author: an extremist in a given group, whose views went unchallenged, may perceive silence as agreement and therefore believe they're part of a team when in fact they're not. > My only critique is that it doesn't work with Firefox. I have to pull up Chrome which I only use for work. Do you have a social media profile to follow/provide feedback to? It does work on Firefox but you have to disable tracking protection [1]. The reason is because Reddit, to which Reveddit obviously must connect, appears on an arbitrary list of domains that Firefox's partner Disconnect.me considers to be "trackers" [2]. That list breaks tons of websites that are tracked and seemingly ignored in this 8 year old bug [https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1101005 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1101005]. The bug is updated with new sites almost every day. I'm not up to date on how browsers or standards are changing, but I'm guessing the Disconnect.me list is a hack until a better solution can be found. I don't know of a better solution. I'm all ears if you have one provided it doesn't cost me more or hurt the site's operation by putting its logic on a server [3]. [1] https://www.reveddit.com/about/faq/#firefox https://www.reveddit.com/about/faq/#firefox [2] https://github.com/disconnectme/disconnect-tracking-protection/blob/b3f9cdcea541ab876e63970daadc490f9de2befa/services.json#L10851 https://github.com/disconnectme/disconnect-tracking-protecti... [3] https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/mozilla.dev.privacy/XO84EzrwWp0 https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/mozilla.dev.privacy/...
speedgoose 4y ago
Do you still display content removed by their authors and not the moderators?
- rhaksw 4y ago
  My focus has always been to reveal secretive removals to authors, and Reveddit has never shown author-deleted body text, https://www.reveddit.com/about/faq/#user-deleted https://www.reveddit.com/about/faq/#user-deleted
  - speedgoose 4y ago
    Thanks! I may have thought about removeddit by mistake.
- CodesInChaos 4y ago
  You need to use unddit.com for that
throw_m239339 4y ago
Wow, great. Of course I'm getting shadow censored left and right on reddit, but I always knew it was the case. I'm not using reddit anymore anyway. Too many hidden rules, not even as a simple user, but as a sub creator, where you can't tell your own sub redditors why their comment were removed, per reddit admin rules, that's absolutely crazy, and if you disclose the hidden rules, your sub is banned.
- rhaksw 4y ago
  > I'm not using reddit anymore anyway. Secretive removals happen on all of the platforms (see 5:50 in the talk [1]). Plus, the groups who are brainwashed by it are large enough to have an impact in the real world. I don't think it benefits anyone. We're much better off knowing when conversations have been interrupted. [1] https://cantsayanything.win/2022-10-transparent-moderation/ https://cantsayanything.win/2022-10-transparent-moderation/
  - kiririn 4y ago
    It is a scary reality, one that I think the average person would be strongly against if they were aware of it. I would go so far as to say there should be laws or regulations preventing shadow banning/deletions
    - rhaksw 4y ago
      > It is a scary reality that I think the average person would be strongly against if they were aware of it. That makes it easy to support raising awareness about it, which isn't scary at all. > I would go so far as to say there should be laws or regulations preventing shadow banning/deletions Nope, don't go there. The government is a huge hammer and they would love the opportunity to take this win from you. If you start making exceptions to the holding that "code is speech", then eventually you're going to lose something you care about that the government is after, such as encryption. And, a law that "bans encryption", which we all know isn't possible, would just further entrench existing power structures. The law would be arbitrarily applied because you can't ban math. The same is true for banning shadow moderation. Either the behavior will shift overseas, or local companies will skirt around the written law. Ultimately, society will have to accept that only individuals can hold individual decision makers accountable. We are each our own worst enemy, and each our own best advocate. And, it takes less time to build Reveddit-like systems that apply transparency to existing social media platforms than it takes existing platforms and power structures to alter their behavior or grow userbases for new platforms. You need to flip your thinking. They don't have the power to control you, you control yourself, and therefore you have the ability to challenge the status quo.
ThrowawayTestr 4y ago
Thank you for doing this.
- rhaksw 4y ago
  I'm happy to do it, I've learned a ton about speech, myself, and society along the way. I also enjoy getting feedback, positive or negative, so please shoot me a note if you're thinking anything either here, via the address listed in my HN profile, or https://twitter.com/rhaksw https://twitter.com/rhaksw
shmde 4y ago
If you browse political/country subreddits (r/india for me), this is the only correct way to browse that subreddit because a slight agreement with a new government policy/good news regarding India gets removed by mods pretty quick.
- delta_p_delta_x 4y ago
  /r/India is a cesspit of vitriol against anything 'traditionally' Indian or Hindu.
i67vw3 4y ago
I indirectly use your product. I surf reddit via teddit, libreddit and both of the. have integrated reveddit into their codebase. If a comment is removed by reddit mods/admins, on libreddit you get a small notice which then directly links the notice to reveddit site from which I can see what the deleted comment looked like.
- rhaksw 4y ago
  Looks like libreddit links to another site whose differences I mentioned here [1]. See here for example [2]. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33478793 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33478793 [2] https://libreddit.spike.codes/r/meirl/comments/ymj861/meirl/iv482k7/ https://libreddit.spike.codes/r/meirl/comments/ymj861/meirl/...
  - i67vw3 4y ago
    As I remember it, libreddit used to have reveddit integrated. They must have changed it or I might have confused it with teddit. But, teddit right now does have reveddit integrated. https://teddit.pussthecat.org/r/meirl/comments/ymj861/meirl/iv482k7/ https://teddit.pussthecat.org/r/meirl/comments/ymj861/meirl/... Also, is there no way to use Reveddit without turning of Enhanced Tracking Protection in firefox. Could the reddit tracker be proxied from reveddit's end so that firefox (tracker blocker) does not block the tracker.
    - rhaksw 4y ago
      > teddit right now does have reveddit integrated. Oh I see, they link it from the [deleted] author name instead of the [removed] content. That's an odd choice. > Could the reddit tracker be proxied from reveddit's end teddit and libreddit may themselves be trackers! I don't see how proxying empowers users. You don't need to be a huge company to be a tracker, and that's the problem I have with this arbitrary disconnect.me list which I mentioned in another comment [1]. It's picking and choosing who you should trust, and that is a dubious security strategy. We should be building systems that are trustworthy, not relying on lists of domains. Inevitably, such lists are flawed. They are arguably rotten to the core because they're telling you to trust new domains that won't appear on their list (such as your pussthecat.org link) and not to trust anyone they mark as "evil". I don't think any social media site or proxy site deserves blind trust. Caveat emptor. Plus, if I set up such a proxy I'd just end up hitting Reddit's API limits because requests would then go out from fewer sources. By allowing clients to make the requests, it's the same as users opening the app or website. I guess these other sites you mention don't get much traffic, otherwise they would be hitting those rate limits. Reveddit also makes more requests than them because they, like Reddit, do not show where auto-removed comments appear. For example, this comment [2] should have a reply. Reveddit can show it [3]. Even if the author and content were not filled in from the user page, Reveddit would still show a marker for that removed comment. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33478410 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33478410 [2] https://teddit.pussthecat.org/r/interestingasfuck/comments/wenhq7/better_than_erasing_it/iiq23ej/ https://teddit.pussthecat.org/r/interestingasfuck/comments/w... [3] https://www.reveddit.com/v/interestingasfuck/comments/wenhq7/better_than_erasing_it/iiq23ej/?add_user=rhaksw...new.all.t1_iipkyze..&#t1_iiq23ej https://www.reveddit.com/v/interestingasfuck/comments/wenhq7...
jachee 4y ago
Any chance you could work with Christian to get this functionality worked into Apollo? I can’t stand to use Reddit any other way, but this would be nice functionality to have.
Semaphor 4y ago
Insights I got from my own account: a) Reddit randomly decides some posts were spam and shadow-banned them O.o Content was all over the place, from links to link-free text posts. Weird. b) Low quality subs (/r/europe, /r/Germany, cryptocurrency subs) liberally shadowban all kinds of comments. All other places this shows, have comments/flairs about the removal.
- Scharkenberg 4y ago
  Subs cannot "shadowban" users themselves. Either one banned and gets a notice, or one isn't banned at all. Comment removal initiated by moderators themselves is not "shadowbanning" - that's something Reddit's automated mechanisms (and maybe admins too) do. I think you meant "content removal without explanation" instead. I will say, however, that for about half a year now or even more, reddit's own anti-spam detection has been filtering too many posts in a sub (60k big) that I co-moderate, to the point where we've had to manually reinstate up to a dozen posts on specific days.
  - pluc 4y ago
    We experienced that too, at a much higher rate. Mods would get blamed for deletions AutoMod would do. Turned into quite a shitshow.
    - rhaksw 4y ago
      > We experienced that too, at a much higher rate. Mods would get blamed for deletions AutoMod would do. Turned into quite a shitshow. Sorry, how are mods not responsible for the bot they coded? Or, are you saying users were attributing the removals to humans rather than understanding that it was done by a script? If the latter, then I'm not sure the distinction is so important for users. What they care about is understanding why their content was removed, not how. And I think that is a fair question. In the real world, we do not throw criminals in jail without explaining what they did wrong and putting that in the public record. Obviously it's different online, but I think at the very least users should be able to discover when their content has been removed. The system shouldn't pretend that their removed content is publicly visible. And, there is some research that indicates that when mods provide removal explanations on posts, it reduces the likelihood of that user having a post removed in the future [1]. That's a reduction in mod workload that should be of interest to moderators, and it was researched and published before Reddit started showing post removal notices on posts [2]. Prior to that, all posts were shadow removed. Now only some are shadow removed, and all comments are shadow removed. To my knowledge, this research has not yet been done for comments. [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/duwdco/should_moderators_provide_removal_explanations/f79o1yr/ https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/duwdco/should_mode... [2] https://www.reddit.com/r/changelog/comments/e66fql/post_removal_details_on_the_new_design_redesign/ https://www.reddit.com/r/changelog/comments/e66fql/post_remo...
teddyh 4y ago
Direct YouTube link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCadmiIfbcI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCadmiIfbcI
- rhaksw 4y ago
  But then you don't get the slides which sync with the video :)
samhuk 4y ago
I can see how shadowbanning ("bot-bans") is effective against bot accounts, since it's less trivial for a bot maker to write code that detects when their bot has been detected, resulting in a lower rate of new bot accounts. That makes sense. However what seems to have occurred is a widespread blatant misuse of bot-bans to silence different views from the group of moderators. shadowbanning is obviously a security-through-obscurity measure. Instead of having good bot detection, they seem to just give moderators an invisible-yet-almighty ban hammer with no accountability. I've personally never used Reddit other than as a lurker to skim the valuable content from subreddits like r/BIFL, etc. I've found the politiking of platforms like Reddit too vitriolic for my tastes :/
- rhaksw 4y ago
  > I can see how shadowbanning ("bot-bans")is effective against bot accounts, since it's less trivial for a bot maker to write code that detects when their bot has been detected, resulting in a lower rate of new bot accounts. Huh? It's trivial to write code that detects shadow bans, and bot-makers are more likely to write such code than individuals who get shadow banned. I mention this at 28:00 in the linked video on this post. The fuss over bots makes no sense to me. It's just an excuse to build more dystopian shadow removal or shadow demotion tools. Bot or not, some human is behind the pushing of every single piece of content you see. There is no AGI, and therefore machine-learning-driven algorithms are trained on data that comes from humans.
  - samhuk 4y ago
    Like security through obscurity, it will thwart probably a small percentage of the total new bot accounts. The issue is that you are right, eventually people catch on to the obscurity.
  - pixl97 4y ago
    >The fuss over bots makes no sense to me. Have you been paying attention to some of the content ending up on reddit then? I've been seeing accounts in posts with no original content. They appear to index other users threads then apply some ML and post them to other similar subjects where it seems to fit. It was only when I saw one of these bots post the same content in a thread with two different user accounts that I realised this was a thing. "But it comes from humans" Cancer is a human cell, just coming from humans doesn't mean it can have a negative outcome if allowed to spread. Reddit is a business with costs. The business model assumes that at least some percentage of content pulled will drive ad revenue that allows the business to run servers. You can keep increasing the portion of bots to humans to the point that the business model is not sustainable. Letting "Dead Internet Theory" run wild is a great way to go out of business quickly.
pluc 4y ago
I was a mod, this tool is the worst from a mod's perspective. In a sub with 100k-200k people, I would spend all my time telling users why I took action. Instead I take action when content breaks rules, and it's your responsibility to abide by the rules to not have your content deleted. This tool complicates the life of people who give their time for free, and asks them to provide even more time solely to satisfy user curiosity. I don't like it.
- loceng 4y ago
  So the #2 problem is that you're not getting paid. And the #1 problem is actually much worse since "you" aren't paid - in that there is a strong likelihood that "you": 1) are a paid shill to suppress specific content by either domestic or foreign bad actors (government or industrial complex trying to control/suppress narratives), and/or 2) "you" have an ideological bent - and are "passionate" (and biased) on certain issues and why you're volunteering your time.
  - pluc 4y ago
    Totally agree. There are great mods then there are people with an agenda. The reputation mods get on reddit is always one of selfish, controlling power-tripping assholes, but for the large majority that's way off. But there's also cases where it's completely justified.
    - aliqot 4y ago
      They do it for free...
      - loceng 4y ago
        For "free"...
        rhaksw 4y ago
        You're right, and that's an important point. The message that "they do it for free" may be propaganda itself. We don't know that to be true, so it's wrong to assert that any given mod either is not or is being paid, short of evidence indicating the latter. I don't know how you would prove the former, particularly given the existence of digital coins. Bitcoin seems perfect for this along with a host of other things for which secret payment might be useful. Come to think of it, that may make a pretty good case for making moderation transparent. You can't ever be sure someone isn't being paid to influence the conversation, and therefore users deserve to be able to review what gets removed.
loceng 4y ago
I think this has been a great tool to use since I was introduced. Thanks.
loceng 4y ago
Have you received any legal pressure to shutdown?
- rhaksw 4y ago
  Not yet! I don't think there would be any basis for it. The site is all code. Data comes from Pushshift and Reddit, and even Pushshift hasn't had any trouble as far as I know. On top of that, legal action might draw more attention to the issue. The funny thing about censorship is it ends up helping promote the censored idea; that is, once the censorship is discovered.
MonkeyMalarky 4y ago
Holy smokes, so many orphaned comments! Reddit is the absolute worst for preserving history. If you ever google something and open a few years old thread its just one deleted user/comment replying to another, totally useless.
lazyasciiart 4y ago
On my phone, the link to the CantSayAnything/About/Sticky page goes to a 404. I thought Kelly Cotters paper was very interesting - it seems like “gaslighting” is becoming a more common way to call out people or companies who are not technically lying but are definitely communicating something that isn’t true. Unfortunately that’s a common enough thing now that it’s useful to have a simple reference.
- rhaksw 4y ago
  > On my phone, the link to the CantSayAnything/About/Sticky page goes to a 404. Try this, https://www.reddit.com/r/CantSayAnything/comments/xwvbsy/write_any_comment_here_20221006/ https://www.reddit.com/r/CantSayAnything/comments/xwvbsy/wri... > I thought Kelly Cotters paper was very interesting Yes she is great. To my knowledge, she's one of the few who has actually questioned and researched the area of shadow moderation. Here's the paper for any interested, https://kelleycotter.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Shadowbanning-is-not-a-thing-black-box-gaslighting-and-the-power-to-independently-know-and-credibly-critique-algorithms.pdf https://kelleycotter.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Shadowba...
nullc 4y ago
Unfortunately, reveddit has stopped showing content that was removed by reddit administration-- which is also usually hidden from the user-- it's made it much harder to appeal screwups by reddit itself because you can't see the content you're being punished over. Ever since someone started an off-site campaign to false-report bomb me I've had to screenshot every comment I make myself just so I have records when reddit inevitably screws up and suspends me for a completely innocuous comment again.
- rhaksw 4y ago
  > Unfortunately, reveddit has stopped showing content that was removed by reddit administration Technically, I never showed it. The change is that Reddit changed the way they were doing comment removals, and I declined to update Reveddit to show the body text of those. I did update the site to label them as admin removals [1]. I gave my reasoning for this in several posts recently [2] [3]. > which is also usually hidden from the user-- it's made it much harder to appeal screwups by reddit itself because you can't see the content you're being punished over. I see that as Reddit's fault, not mine. Their system could easily show you, the logged in user, your own content with the same sort of indicator that mods see, the red background. They once wrote, > "Privacy is core to our DNA, our culture, and our values. We are committed to making our policies clear and focused on empowering users to be masters of their identities—and their data." [4] Hold them to that, not me. [1] https://old.reddit.com/r/reveddit/comments/w8i11a/good_news_admins_are_being_more_transparent_by/ https://old.reddit.com/r/reveddit/comments/w8i11a/good_news_... [2] https://old.reddit.com/r/FreeSpeech/comments/yabyzu/revedditcom_improving_online_discourse_with/iuvjia7/?context=3 https://old.reddit.com/r/FreeSpeech/comments/yabyzu/reveddit... [3] https://old.reddit.com/r/reveddit/comments/x6332d/reveddit_was_the_best_now_its_useless/in5bq26/ https://old.reddit.com/r/reveddit/comments/x6332d/reveddit_w... [4] https://www.reddit.com/r/privacy/comments/ixx6mo/i_just_got_the_new_reddit_privacy_policy_send_to/ https://www.reddit.com/r/privacy/comments/ixx6mo/i_just_got_...
  - nullc 4y ago
    My apologies, I didn't intend to imply you were in any way wrong there -- I'd assumed that the material was omitted to keep the services from being blocked, it sounds like that was part of your reasons but I'm thankful to have learned of more of them. I know the opacity is ultimately reddit's fault (and I've complained to them about it), but reddit these days seems almost completely unresponsive to small scale public feedback. Thanks for the citations. (from your comments) > Since I regard secrecy from authors as the bigger problem, I guess part of the problem with the admin removals is that while the removal itself may not be secret (though it's often hidden, e.g. requiring a direct link to a removed thread), the rational and basis for it always is. It increasingly appears to be automated based on user reports and if any human is reading the text at all in many cases they must not be native english speakers. (I've noticed that a lot of the more obviously bad admin removals seem to happen in deep in the night, pacific time). To the extent that user-community moderation is often bad and admin moderation grows in frequency in response I think we can only expect admin moderation to become more incompetent and kafkaesque: As you note, it fundamentally can't scale but they can (and I think have) respond to the lack of scalability by just doing a worse job of it rather than not taking actions. But regardless, I understand your focus better now. If you ever do come across a way to give posters access to their own admin removed comments without creating risk or distraction for your focus on shadow moderation, I know it would be appreciated by many.
nullc 4y ago
I'm of the view that users subjected to an outright shadow ban should at least have a civil cause of action available for all the time they unnecessarily wasted writing comments that no one else will ever see. If that was established perhaps we'd see the despicable practice go away. There are a few cases where I can almost see it as justified-- not spam as its trivial for spammers to automate detection of-- but certain kind of obsessive mentally ill-people that will forever shout their abusive and disruptive comments into the void if shadowbanned but get a new account if they are informed. But that fringe case just can't justify the abuse against more reasonable people, particular in a world where users are frequently actioned against in error.
- rhaksw 4y ago
  > I'm of the view that users subjected to an outright shadow ban should at least have a civil cause of action available for all the time they unnecessarily wasted writing comments that no one else will ever see. And for shadow removed comments too? Because that's the majority of it, and slicing and dicing what stays up versus what is secreted away makes it much harder for users to discover that shadow moderation is happening. I don't think it will work. As mentioned elsewhere [1], the government (as an entity, not a particular political party) would love to be your savior here. If they get to pick and choose who wins they will end up controlling social media. They're not going to be able to handle all of the shadow removals or demotions that occur; heck, shadow moderation has been occurring since the dawn of social media and society is hardly aware of it now 16 years later. So, since they couldn't handle all those cases, they'd have to be selective, and that is just more cronyism. No, we need citizen-built transparency systems starting ASAP. Nobody will help us better than ourselves [2]. > There are a few cases where I can almost see it as justified-- not spam as its trivial for spammers to automate detection of-- but certain kind of obsessive mentally ill-people that will forever shout their abusive and disruptive comments into the void if shadowbanned but get a new account if they are informed. But that fringe case just can't justify the abuse against more reasonable people, particular in a world where users are frequently actioned against in error. Yes, exactly. It's a fringe case that we know will come up, and it will be annoying but it won't destroy society as we know it, whereas the systems as built today are doing exactly that. The good part is, it's an easy win. Tell people about it, get people to talk and write about it, and show people who work at social media companies that we don't like or want systems that are driven by shadow moderation. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33480576 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33480576 [2] https://youtu.be/aCadmiIfbcI?t=1571 https://youtu.be/aCadmiIfbcI?t=1571
jquery 4y ago
Reveddit is where I go when I need to remind myself why I appreciate the Reddit mods.
mhuffman 4y ago
Very interesting and eye-opening talk! I checked one of my old Reddit usernames (I don't really use Reddit anymore) and was gobsmacked at how many (I thought were relatively innocuous) comments that were shadow-banned. And then others in the same subreddit that were nearly identical passed right through! Also some of the links on your slide-deck are just as eye-popping (eg. the public-private discourse document with crosstabs). Lots of good info in there. Good work! However, I am not sure what to do with this information except perhaps sharing it with some people I know own Reddit (as per your FAQ), but then that makes me think "then what"? What happens then? Getting Reveddit exposure is good, but there does not seem to be a clear stated strategy of how any of that traction will be practically used. Also, on slide #60 of your presentation you have a slide title of "There is no evidence that censorship doesn't change minds." I don't know if I am just having a slow brain day, but I was not sure how to interpret this in the context of what you were saying and the bullet-points on the slide itself. It this just meant to be a more non-committal version of "Censorship changes minds"?
- rhaksw 4y ago
  > Also some of the links on your slide-deck are just as eye-popping (eg. the public-private discourse document with crosstabs). Lots of good info in there. Thank you for going through it! Yours is the first comment I've seen mentioning the talk. You've provided some great feedback here that I will incorporate into future versions of any related presentations. > However, I am not sure what to do with this information except perhaps sharing it with some people I know own Reddit (as per your FAQ), Right, I think we need to do two things. (1) build these systems for other platforms, and (2) raise awareness about what's going on by telling stories about it. I've got some idea about how to do both of these, but I don't own the patent or anything. So to the extent that someone's motivated to collaborate, I'm willing. This is very grass roots. To get to the point where I could so openly collect my thoughts has taken some time, however now I've got a good idea about how to go about it. In fact I've always felt that way about this work! Every couple of weeks I'm like, oh, I should be doing that. Then I go do it and I reach a new milestone, but real public awareness remains elusive. I've tried reaching out to hundreds of journalists and several organizations who support free speech and so far haven't had success, so if you have any connections and want to fire off an email or tweet about shadow moderation, Reveddit, or the talk, please do your worst. > but then that makes me think "then what"? What happens then? Getting Reveddit exposure is good, but there does not seem to be a clear stated strategy of how any of that traction will be practically used. Well, I can say with confidence that when the site is shared on Reddit, groups do change. Users create new groups, moderators become more open, or admins may even step in. So my expectation is that sharing it on other social media sites might lead to more discussion and possibly more openness from platforms, because again this is happening everywhere on every side of every issue in every geography. For example, I have virtually no Twitter following and don't know how to do Twitter, especially since I'm usually awake while you all are sleeping. Does that provide some ideas for direction? I know it's not all buttoned up like a campaign from FightForTheFuture. I'd love for it to be like that, but right now it's still just me, and maybe you all. I don't have good ideas for what to do with money so I am not asking for donations. Another to-do is to start doing video shorts on stuff that gets removed, like Cheyenne did here [1] [2]. > Also, on slide #60 of your presentation you have a slide title of "There is no evidence that censorship doesn't change minds." I don't know if I am just having a slow brain day, but I was not sure how to interpret this in the context of what you were saying and the bullet-points on the slide itself. Is this just meant to be a more non-committal version of "Censorship changes minds"? Yes, that's a much better way of putting it, or maybe "Myth: Censorship might change minds" ? I think I was thinking of this conversation [3] where I said "countering negative ideas with suppression does not work", and someone else said they don't believe it. I've seen the same argument made elsewhere too. Since this talk, I have developed a stronger opinion on that. I now believe censorship creates the toxic environment that mods seek to eliminate [4]. [1] https://www.tiktok.com/@cheyenne.l.hunt/video/7111505389950242094?is_copy_url=1&is_from_webapp=v1 https://www.tiktok.com/@cheyenne.l.hunt/video/71115053899502... [2] https://www.tiktok.com/@cheyenne.l.hunt/video/7111858102638529835 https://www.tiktok.com/@cheyenne.l.hunt/video/71118581026385... [3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33055132 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33055132 [4] https://old.reddit.com/r/TheoryOfReddit/comments/ymeqaz/hate_on_reddit_a_global_lists_of_toxic_users/iv4aet6/ https://old.reddit.com/r/TheoryOfReddit/comments/ymeqaz/hate...

180 points by rhaksw 4y ago

beefman 4y ago

Just tested this on my 15-year-old account and it's really well executed. Great work! The main link here should be to reveddit, not the video at cantsayanything as it is now.

rhaksw 4y ago
> Just tested this on my 15-year-old account and it's really well executed. Great work! Thanks! > The main link here should be to reveddit, not the video at cantsayanything as it is now. I intended to share the video because it's an overview of what I've learned while building the site, which I thought might engender more interesting discussion than the tool itself. TL;DW I think secret removals creates the toxicity it seeks to remove. See also this ongoing discussion: https://www.reddit.com/r/TheoryOfReddit/comments/ymeqaz/hate_on_reddit_a_global_lists_of_toxic_users/iv4aet6/ https://www.reddit.com/r/TheoryOfReddit/comments/ymeqaz/hate...
- beefman 4y ago
  For Show HN, it's customary to link directly to the product. I agree about secret removals.
  - rhaksw 4y ago
    I see. I don't see a specific mention about the link itself in the rules for Show HN. I also think customs are less fixed than rules and don't need to be moderated. https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html

dmix 4y ago

I love reveddit.com, it's hilarious to look at the typical r/science post and see 60%+ of comments removed on average (the 'controversial' ones go 75%+). If the moderators agree with the study there is zero dissent tolerated. This subreddit has something like 1000+ moderators and they remove any comments that doesn't fit into Reddit's very narrowly defined overton window. Not just people being off-topic or taboo... but often anyone who questions the studies being posted. My only critique is that it doesn't work with Firefox. I have to pull up Chrome which I only use for work. Do you have a social media profile to follow/provide feedback to?

rhaksw 4y ago
> I love reveddit.com, it's hilarious to look at the typical r/science post and see 60%+ of comments removed on average (the 'controversial' ones go 75%+). Yeah I mention r/science at 7:00 in the linked video. > If the moderators agree with the study there is zero dissent tolerated. This subreddit has something like 1000+ moderators and they remove any comments that doesn't fit into Reddit's very narrowly defined overton window. Not just people being off-topic or taboo... but often anyone who questions the studies being posted. I'm sure that's true. I haven't looked at the exact biases in that group too much. For awhile I was collecting examples of biased removals in certain groups, but that was just so I could come up with relatable stories to tell. I disagree with pretty much every secretive removal. Even in cases where someone is threatening violence I wonder whether we should keep such a removal secret from the author: an extremist in a given group, whose views went unchallenged, may perceive silence as agreement and therefore believe they're part of a team when in fact they're not. > My only critique is that it doesn't work with Firefox. I have to pull up Chrome which I only use for work. Do you have a social media profile to follow/provide feedback to? It does work on Firefox but you have to disable tracking protection [1]. The reason is because Reddit, to which Reveddit obviously must connect, appears on an arbitrary list of domains that Firefox's partner Disconnect.me considers to be "trackers" [2]. That list breaks tons of websites that are tracked and seemingly ignored in this 8 year old bug [https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1101005 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1101005]. The bug is updated with new sites almost every day. I'm not up to date on how browsers or standards are changing, but I'm guessing the Disconnect.me list is a hack until a better solution can be found. I don't know of a better solution. I'm all ears if you have one provided it doesn't cost me more or hurt the site's operation by putting its logic on a server [3]. [1] https://www.reveddit.com/about/faq/#firefox https://www.reveddit.com/about/faq/#firefox [2] https://github.com/disconnectme/disconnect-tracking-protection/blob/b3f9cdcea541ab876e63970daadc490f9de2befa/services.json#L10851 https://github.com/disconnectme/disconnect-tracking-protecti... [3] https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/mozilla.dev.privacy/XO84EzrwWp0 https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/mozilla.dev.privacy/...

speedgoose 4y ago

Do you still display content removed by their authors and not the moderators?

rhaksw 4y ago
My focus has always been to reveal secretive removals to authors, and Reveddit has never shown author-deleted body text, https://www.reveddit.com/about/faq/#user-deleted https://www.reveddit.com/about/faq/#user-deleted
- speedgoose 4y ago
  Thanks! I may have thought about removeddit by mistake.
CodesInChaos 4y ago
You need to use unddit.com for that

throw_m239339 4y ago

Wow, great. Of course I'm getting shadow censored left and right on reddit, but I always knew it was the case. I'm not using reddit anymore anyway. Too many hidden rules, not even as a simple user, but as a sub creator, where you can't tell your own sub redditors why their comment were removed, per reddit admin rules, that's absolutely crazy, and if you disclose the hidden rules, your sub is banned.

rhaksw 4y ago
> I'm not using reddit anymore anyway. Secretive removals happen on all of the platforms (see 5:50 in the talk [1]). Plus, the groups who are brainwashed by it are large enough to have an impact in the real world. I don't think it benefits anyone. We're much better off knowing when conversations have been interrupted. [1] https://cantsayanything.win/2022-10-transparent-moderation/ https://cantsayanything.win/2022-10-transparent-moderation/
- kiririn 4y ago
  It is a scary reality, one that I think the average person would be strongly against if they were aware of it. I would go so far as to say there should be laws or regulations preventing shadow banning/deletions
  - rhaksw 4y ago
    > It is a scary reality that I think the average person would be strongly against if they were aware of it. That makes it easy to support raising awareness about it, which isn't scary at all. > I would go so far as to say there should be laws or regulations preventing shadow banning/deletions Nope, don't go there. The government is a huge hammer and they would love the opportunity to take this win from you. If you start making exceptions to the holding that "code is speech", then eventually you're going to lose something you care about that the government is after, such as encryption. And, a law that "bans encryption", which we all know isn't possible, would just further entrench existing power structures. The law would be arbitrarily applied because you can't ban math. The same is true for banning shadow moderation. Either the behavior will shift overseas, or local companies will skirt around the written law. Ultimately, society will have to accept that only individuals can hold individual decision makers accountable. We are each our own worst enemy, and each our own best advocate. And, it takes less time to build Reveddit-like systems that apply transparency to existing social media platforms than it takes existing platforms and power structures to alter their behavior or grow userbases for new platforms. You need to flip your thinking. They don't have the power to control you, you control yourself, and therefore you have the ability to challenge the status quo.

ThrowawayTestr 4y ago

Thank you for doing this.

rhaksw 4y ago
I'm happy to do it, I've learned a ton about speech, myself, and society along the way. I also enjoy getting feedback, positive or negative, so please shoot me a note if you're thinking anything either here, via the address listed in my HN profile, or https://twitter.com/rhaksw https://twitter.com/rhaksw

shmde 4y ago

If you browse political/country subreddits (r/india for me), this is the only correct way to browse that subreddit because a slight agreement with a new government policy/good news regarding India gets removed by mods pretty quick.

delta_p_delta_x 4y ago
/r/India is a cesspit of vitriol against anything 'traditionally' Indian or Hindu.

i67vw3 4y ago

I indirectly use your product. I surf reddit via teddit, libreddit and both of the. have integrated reveddit into their codebase. If a comment is removed by reddit mods/admins, on libreddit you get a small notice which then directly links the notice to reveddit site from which I can see what the deleted comment looked like.

rhaksw 4y ago
Looks like libreddit links to another site whose differences I mentioned here [1]. See here for example [2]. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33478793 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33478793 [2] https://libreddit.spike.codes/r/meirl/comments/ymj861/meirl/iv482k7/ https://libreddit.spike.codes/r/meirl/comments/ymj861/meirl/...
- i67vw3 4y ago
  As I remember it, libreddit used to have reveddit integrated. They must have changed it or I might have confused it with teddit. But, teddit right now does have reveddit integrated. https://teddit.pussthecat.org/r/meirl/comments/ymj861/meirl/iv482k7/ https://teddit.pussthecat.org/r/meirl/comments/ymj861/meirl/... Also, is there no way to use Reveddit without turning of Enhanced Tracking Protection in firefox. Could the reddit tracker be proxied from reveddit's end so that firefox (tracker blocker) does not block the tracker.
  - rhaksw 4y ago
    > teddit right now does have reveddit integrated. Oh I see, they link it from the [deleted] author name instead of the [removed] content. That's an odd choice. > Could the reddit tracker be proxied from reveddit's end teddit and libreddit may themselves be trackers! I don't see how proxying empowers users. You don't need to be a huge company to be a tracker, and that's the problem I have with this arbitrary disconnect.me list which I mentioned in another comment [1]. It's picking and choosing who you should trust, and that is a dubious security strategy. We should be building systems that are trustworthy, not relying on lists of domains. Inevitably, such lists are flawed. They are arguably rotten to the core because they're telling you to trust new domains that won't appear on their list (such as your pussthecat.org link) and not to trust anyone they mark as "evil". I don't think any social media site or proxy site deserves blind trust. Caveat emptor. Plus, if I set up such a proxy I'd just end up hitting Reddit's API limits because requests would then go out from fewer sources. By allowing clients to make the requests, it's the same as users opening the app or website. I guess these other sites you mention don't get much traffic, otherwise they would be hitting those rate limits. Reveddit also makes more requests than them because they, like Reddit, do not show where auto-removed comments appear. For example, this comment [2] should have a reply. Reveddit can show it [3]. Even if the author and content were not filled in from the user page, Reveddit would still show a marker for that removed comment. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33478410 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33478410 [2] https://teddit.pussthecat.org/r/interestingasfuck/comments/wenhq7/better_than_erasing_it/iiq23ej/ https://teddit.pussthecat.org/r/interestingasfuck/comments/w... [3] https://www.reveddit.com/v/interestingasfuck/comments/wenhq7/better_than_erasing_it/iiq23ej/?add_user=rhaksw...new.all.t1_iipkyze..&#t1_iiq23ej https://www.reveddit.com/v/interestingasfuck/comments/wenhq7...

jachee 4y ago

Any chance you could work with Christian to get this functionality worked into Apollo? I can’t stand to use Reddit any other way, but this would be nice functionality to have.

Semaphor 4y ago

Insights I got from my own account: a) Reddit randomly decides some posts were spam and shadow-banned them O.o Content was all over the place, from links to link-free text posts. Weird. b) Low quality subs (/r/europe, /r/Germany, cryptocurrency subs) liberally shadowban all kinds of comments. All other places this shows, have comments/flairs about the removal.

Scharkenberg 4y ago
Subs cannot "shadowban" users themselves. Either one banned and gets a notice, or one isn't banned at all. Comment removal initiated by moderators themselves is not "shadowbanning" - that's something Reddit's automated mechanisms (and maybe admins too) do. I think you meant "content removal without explanation" instead. I will say, however, that for about half a year now or even more, reddit's own anti-spam detection has been filtering too many posts in a sub (60k big) that I co-moderate, to the point where we've had to manually reinstate up to a dozen posts on specific days.
- pluc 4y ago
  We experienced that too, at a much higher rate. Mods would get blamed for deletions AutoMod would do. Turned into quite a shitshow.
  - rhaksw 4y ago
    > We experienced that too, at a much higher rate. Mods would get blamed for deletions AutoMod would do. Turned into quite a shitshow. Sorry, how are mods not responsible for the bot they coded? Or, are you saying users were attributing the removals to humans rather than understanding that it was done by a script? If the latter, then I'm not sure the distinction is so important for users. What they care about is understanding why their content was removed, not how. And I think that is a fair question. In the real world, we do not throw criminals in jail without explaining what they did wrong and putting that in the public record. Obviously it's different online, but I think at the very least users should be able to discover when their content has been removed. The system shouldn't pretend that their removed content is publicly visible. And, there is some research that indicates that when mods provide removal explanations on posts, it reduces the likelihood of that user having a post removed in the future [1]. That's a reduction in mod workload that should be of interest to moderators, and it was researched and published before Reddit started showing post removal notices on posts [2]. Prior to that, all posts were shadow removed. Now only some are shadow removed, and all comments are shadow removed. To my knowledge, this research has not yet been done for comments. [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/duwdco/should_moderators_provide_removal_explanations/f79o1yr/ https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/duwdco/should_mode... [2] https://www.reddit.com/r/changelog/comments/e66fql/post_removal_details_on_the_new_design_redesign/ https://www.reddit.com/r/changelog/comments/e66fql/post_remo...

teddyh 4y ago

Direct YouTube link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCadmiIfbcI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCadmiIfbcI

rhaksw 4y ago
But then you don't get the slides which sync with the video :)

samhuk 4y ago

I can see how shadowbanning ("bot-bans") is effective against bot accounts, since it's less trivial for a bot maker to write code that detects when their bot has been detected, resulting in a lower rate of new bot accounts. That makes sense. However what seems to have occurred is a widespread blatant misuse of bot-bans to silence different views from the group of moderators. shadowbanning is obviously a security-through-obscurity measure. Instead of having good bot detection, they seem to just give moderators an invisible-yet-almighty ban hammer with no accountability. I've personally never used Reddit other than as a lurker to skim the valuable content from subreddits like r/BIFL, etc. I've found the politiking of platforms like Reddit too vitriolic for my tastes :/

rhaksw 4y ago
> I can see how shadowbanning ("bot-bans")is effective against bot accounts, since it's less trivial for a bot maker to write code that detects when their bot has been detected, resulting in a lower rate of new bot accounts. Huh? It's trivial to write code that detects shadow bans, and bot-makers are more likely to write such code than individuals who get shadow banned. I mention this at 28:00 in the linked video on this post. The fuss over bots makes no sense to me. It's just an excuse to build more dystopian shadow removal or shadow demotion tools. Bot or not, some human is behind the pushing of every single piece of content you see. There is no AGI, and therefore machine-learning-driven algorithms are trained on data that comes from humans.
- samhuk 4y ago
  Like security through obscurity, it will thwart probably a small percentage of the total new bot accounts. The issue is that you are right, eventually people catch on to the obscurity.
- pixl97 4y ago
  >The fuss over bots makes no sense to me. Have you been paying attention to some of the content ending up on reddit then? I've been seeing accounts in posts with no original content. They appear to index other users threads then apply some ML and post them to other similar subjects where it seems to fit. It was only when I saw one of these bots post the same content in a thread with two different user accounts that I realised this was a thing. "But it comes from humans" Cancer is a human cell, just coming from humans doesn't mean it can have a negative outcome if allowed to spread. Reddit is a business with costs. The business model assumes that at least some percentage of content pulled will drive ad revenue that allows the business to run servers. You can keep increasing the portion of bots to humans to the point that the business model is not sustainable. Letting "Dead Internet Theory" run wild is a great way to go out of business quickly.

pluc 4y ago

I was a mod, this tool is the worst from a mod's perspective. In a sub with 100k-200k people, I would spend all my time telling users why I took action. Instead I take action when content breaks rules, and it's your responsibility to abide by the rules to not have your content deleted. This tool complicates the life of people who give their time for free, and asks them to provide even more time solely to satisfy user curiosity. I don't like it.

loceng 4y ago
So the #2 problem is that you're not getting paid. And the #1 problem is actually much worse since "you" aren't paid - in that there is a strong likelihood that "you": 1) are a paid shill to suppress specific content by either domestic or foreign bad actors (government or industrial complex trying to control/suppress narratives), and/or 2) "you" have an ideological bent - and are "passionate" (and biased) on certain issues and why you're volunteering your time.
- pluc 4y ago
  Totally agree. There are great mods then there are people with an agenda. The reputation mods get on reddit is always one of selfish, controlling power-tripping assholes, but for the large majority that's way off. But there's also cases where it's completely justified.
  - aliqot 4y ago
    They do it for free...
    - loceng 4y ago
      For "free"...
      - rhaksw 4y ago
        You're right, and that's an important point. The message that "they do it for free" may be propaganda itself. We don't know that to be true, so it's wrong to assert that any given mod either is not or is being paid, short of evidence indicating the latter. I don't know how you would prove the former, particularly given the existence of digital coins. Bitcoin seems perfect for this along with a host of other things for which secret payment might be useful. Come to think of it, that may make a pretty good case for making moderation transparent. You can't ever be sure someone isn't being paid to influence the conversation, and therefore users deserve to be able to review what gets removed.

loceng 4y ago

I think this has been a great tool to use since I was introduced. Thanks.

loceng 4y ago

Have you received any legal pressure to shutdown?

rhaksw 4y ago
Not yet! I don't think there would be any basis for it. The site is all code. Data comes from Pushshift and Reddit, and even Pushshift hasn't had any trouble as far as I know. On top of that, legal action might draw more attention to the issue. The funny thing about censorship is it ends up helping promote the censored idea; that is, once the censorship is discovered.

MonkeyMalarky 4y ago

Holy smokes, so many orphaned comments! Reddit is the absolute worst for preserving history. If you ever google something and open a few years old thread its just one deleted user/comment replying to another, totally useless.

lazyasciiart 4y ago

On my phone, the link to the CantSayAnything/About/Sticky page goes to a 404. I thought Kelly Cotters paper was very interesting - it seems like “gaslighting” is becoming a more common way to call out people or companies who are not technically lying but are definitely communicating something that isn’t true. Unfortunately that’s a common enough thing now that it’s useful to have a simple reference.

rhaksw 4y ago
> On my phone, the link to the CantSayAnything/About/Sticky page goes to a 404. Try this, https://www.reddit.com/r/CantSayAnything/comments/xwvbsy/write_any_comment_here_20221006/ https://www.reddit.com/r/CantSayAnything/comments/xwvbsy/wri... > I thought Kelly Cotters paper was very interesting Yes she is great. To my knowledge, she's one of the few who has actually questioned and researched the area of shadow moderation. Here's the paper for any interested, https://kelleycotter.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Shadowbanning-is-not-a-thing-black-box-gaslighting-and-the-power-to-independently-know-and-credibly-critique-algorithms.pdf https://kelleycotter.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Shadowba...

nullc 4y ago

Unfortunately, reveddit has stopped showing content that was removed by reddit administration-- which is also usually hidden from the user-- it's made it much harder to appeal screwups by reddit itself because you can't see the content you're being punished over. Ever since someone started an off-site campaign to false-report bomb me I've had to screenshot every comment I make myself just so I have records when reddit inevitably screws up and suspends me for a completely innocuous comment again.

rhaksw 4y ago
> Unfortunately, reveddit has stopped showing content that was removed by reddit administration Technically, I never showed it. The change is that Reddit changed the way they were doing comment removals, and I declined to update Reveddit to show the body text of those. I did update the site to label them as admin removals [1]. I gave my reasoning for this in several posts recently [2] [3]. > which is also usually hidden from the user-- it's made it much harder to appeal screwups by reddit itself because you can't see the content you're being punished over. I see that as Reddit's fault, not mine. Their system could easily show you, the logged in user, your own content with the same sort of indicator that mods see, the red background. They once wrote, > "Privacy is core to our DNA, our culture, and our values. We are committed to making our policies clear and focused on empowering users to be masters of their identities—and their data." [4] Hold them to that, not me. [1] https://old.reddit.com/r/reveddit/comments/w8i11a/good_news_admins_are_being_more_transparent_by/ https://old.reddit.com/r/reveddit/comments/w8i11a/good_news_... [2] https://old.reddit.com/r/FreeSpeech/comments/yabyzu/revedditcom_improving_online_discourse_with/iuvjia7/?context=3 https://old.reddit.com/r/FreeSpeech/comments/yabyzu/reveddit... [3] https://old.reddit.com/r/reveddit/comments/x6332d/reveddit_was_the_best_now_its_useless/in5bq26/ https://old.reddit.com/r/reveddit/comments/x6332d/reveddit_w... [4] https://www.reddit.com/r/privacy/comments/ixx6mo/i_just_got_the_new_reddit_privacy_policy_send_to/ https://www.reddit.com/r/privacy/comments/ixx6mo/i_just_got_...
- nullc 4y ago
  My apologies, I didn't intend to imply you were in any way wrong there -- I'd assumed that the material was omitted to keep the services from being blocked, it sounds like that was part of your reasons but I'm thankful to have learned of more of them. I know the opacity is ultimately reddit's fault (and I've complained to them about it), but reddit these days seems almost completely unresponsive to small scale public feedback. Thanks for the citations. (from your comments) > Since I regard secrecy from authors as the bigger problem, I guess part of the problem with the admin removals is that while the removal itself may not be secret (though it's often hidden, e.g. requiring a direct link to a removed thread), the rational and basis for it always is. It increasingly appears to be automated based on user reports and if any human is reading the text at all in many cases they must not be native english speakers. (I've noticed that a lot of the more obviously bad admin removals seem to happen in deep in the night, pacific time). To the extent that user-community moderation is often bad and admin moderation grows in frequency in response I think we can only expect admin moderation to become more incompetent and kafkaesque: As you note, it fundamentally can't scale but they can (and I think have) respond to the lack of scalability by just doing a worse job of it rather than not taking actions. But regardless, I understand your focus better now. If you ever do come across a way to give posters access to their own admin removed comments without creating risk or distraction for your focus on shadow moderation, I know it would be appreciated by many.

nullc 4y ago

I'm of the view that users subjected to an outright shadow ban should at least have a civil cause of action available for all the time they unnecessarily wasted writing comments that no one else will ever see. If that was established perhaps we'd see the despicable practice go away. There are a few cases where I can almost see it as justified-- not spam as its trivial for spammers to automate detection of-- but certain kind of obsessive mentally ill-people that will forever shout their abusive and disruptive comments into the void if shadowbanned but get a new account if they are informed. But that fringe case just can't justify the abuse against more reasonable people, particular in a world where users are frequently actioned against in error.

rhaksw 4y ago
> I'm of the view that users subjected to an outright shadow ban should at least have a civil cause of action available for all the time they unnecessarily wasted writing comments that no one else will ever see. And for shadow removed comments too? Because that's the majority of it, and slicing and dicing what stays up versus what is secreted away makes it much harder for users to discover that shadow moderation is happening. I don't think it will work. As mentioned elsewhere [1], the government (as an entity, not a particular political party) would love to be your savior here. If they get to pick and choose who wins they will end up controlling social media. They're not going to be able to handle all of the shadow removals or demotions that occur; heck, shadow moderation has been occurring since the dawn of social media and society is hardly aware of it now 16 years later. So, since they couldn't handle all those cases, they'd have to be selective, and that is just more cronyism. No, we need citizen-built transparency systems starting ASAP. Nobody will help us better than ourselves [2]. > There are a few cases where I can almost see it as justified-- not spam as its trivial for spammers to automate detection of-- but certain kind of obsessive mentally ill-people that will forever shout their abusive and disruptive comments into the void if shadowbanned but get a new account if they are informed. But that fringe case just can't justify the abuse against more reasonable people, particular in a world where users are frequently actioned against in error. Yes, exactly. It's a fringe case that we know will come up, and it will be annoying but it won't destroy society as we know it, whereas the systems as built today are doing exactly that. The good part is, it's an easy win. Tell people about it, get people to talk and write about it, and show people who work at social media companies that we don't like or want systems that are driven by shadow moderation. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33480576 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33480576 [2] https://youtu.be/aCadmiIfbcI?t=1571 https://youtu.be/aCadmiIfbcI?t=1571

jquery 4y ago

Reveddit is where I go when I need to remind myself why I appreciate the Reddit mods.

mhuffman 4y ago

Very interesting and eye-opening talk! I checked one of my old Reddit usernames (I don't really use Reddit anymore) and was gobsmacked at how many (I thought were relatively innocuous) comments that were shadow-banned. And then others in the same subreddit that were nearly identical passed right through! Also some of the links on your slide-deck are just as eye-popping (eg. the public-private discourse document with crosstabs). Lots of good info in there. Good work! However, I am not sure what to do with this information except perhaps sharing it with some people I know own Reddit (as per your FAQ), but then that makes me think "then what"? What happens then? Getting Reveddit exposure is good, but there does not seem to be a clear stated strategy of how any of that traction will be practically used. Also, on slide #60 of your presentation you have a slide title of "There is no evidence that censorship doesn't change minds." I don't know if I am just having a slow brain day, but I was not sure how to interpret this in the context of what you were saying and the bullet-points on the slide itself. It this just meant to be a more non-committal version of "Censorship changes minds"?

rhaksw 4y ago
> Also some of the links on your slide-deck are just as eye-popping (eg. the public-private discourse document with crosstabs). Lots of good info in there. Thank you for going through it! Yours is the first comment I've seen mentioning the talk. You've provided some great feedback here that I will incorporate into future versions of any related presentations. > However, I am not sure what to do with this information except perhaps sharing it with some people I know own Reddit (as per your FAQ), Right, I think we need to do two things. (1) build these systems for other platforms, and (2) raise awareness about what's going on by telling stories about it. I've got some idea about how to do both of these, but I don't own the patent or anything. So to the extent that someone's motivated to collaborate, I'm willing. This is very grass roots. To get to the point where I could so openly collect my thoughts has taken some time, however now I've got a good idea about how to go about it. In fact I've always felt that way about this work! Every couple of weeks I'm like, oh, I should be doing that. Then I go do it and I reach a new milestone, but real public awareness remains elusive. I've tried reaching out to hundreds of journalists and several organizations who support free speech and so far haven't had success, so if you have any connections and want to fire off an email or tweet about shadow moderation, Reveddit, or the talk, please do your worst. > but then that makes me think "then what"? What happens then? Getting Reveddit exposure is good, but there does not seem to be a clear stated strategy of how any of that traction will be practically used. Well, I can say with confidence that when the site is shared on Reddit, groups do change. Users create new groups, moderators become more open, or admins may even step in. So my expectation is that sharing it on other social media sites might lead to more discussion and possibly more openness from platforms, because again this is happening everywhere on every side of every issue in every geography. For example, I have virtually no Twitter following and don't know how to do Twitter, especially since I'm usually awake while you all are sleeping. Does that provide some ideas for direction? I know it's not all buttoned up like a campaign from FightForTheFuture. I'd love for it to be like that, but right now it's still just me, and maybe you all. I don't have good ideas for what to do with money so I am not asking for donations. Another to-do is to start doing video shorts on stuff that gets removed, like Cheyenne did here [1] [2]. > Also, on slide #60 of your presentation you have a slide title of "There is no evidence that censorship doesn't change minds." I don't know if I am just having a slow brain day, but I was not sure how to interpret this in the context of what you were saying and the bullet-points on the slide itself. Is this just meant to be a more non-committal version of "Censorship changes minds"? Yes, that's a much better way of putting it, or maybe "Myth: Censorship might change minds" ? I think I was thinking of this conversation [3] where I said "countering negative ideas with suppression does not work", and someone else said they don't believe it. I've seen the same argument made elsewhere too. Since this talk, I have developed a stronger opinion on that. I now believe censorship creates the toxic environment that mods seek to eliminate [4]. [1] https://www.tiktok.com/@cheyenne.l.hunt/video/7111505389950242094?is_copy_url=1&is_from_webapp=v1 https://www.tiktok.com/@cheyenne.l.hunt/video/71115053899502... [2] https://www.tiktok.com/@cheyenne.l.hunt/video/7111858102638529835 https://www.tiktok.com/@cheyenne.l.hunt/video/71118581026385... [3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33055132 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33055132 [4] https://old.reddit.com/r/TheoryOfReddit/comments/ymeqaz/hate_on_reddit_a_global_lists_of_toxic_users/iv4aet6/ https://old.reddit.com/r/TheoryOfReddit/comments/ymeqaz/hate...