4 ms·

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

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...
  - pixl97 4y ago
    >In the real world, we do not throw criminals in jail Again, you seem to be very confused about private property. Think of it as a civil action, which at least in US law, that is operated under a completely different set of books and assumptions. For example I can tell you to leave my properly in a civil action without any explanation why. If you come back a criminal charge can be presented against you. Much like a business can remove its patrons at will for (nearly, civil rights apply) any reason they can be negatively impacted if and when they do this to too many people and the patronage stops coming, you still don't have any legal right to their property.
    - rhaksw 4y ago
      You must be trolling, haha, there was more to my quote! We do throw criminals in jail, the point was we don't do it without making a public record of how and why. That was an analogy that you've taken completely out of context and on another tangent.
      - pixl97 4y ago
        While I do think your work is interesting indeed, and needs to be done to examine the problems at hand, and my replies may be unintentionally harsh towards you, there has been a general trend where many users think they have a right to an audience. This presidence doesn't exist without contract, and the contract in social media heavily biased in the direction of the media as the user is only indirectly paying for the service. As you've stated in this thread, an involuntary contract between the government, the media company, and the user are not optimal as it tends to give more power to political entities. Voluntary contracts between the business and non-paying users are seemingly just as worthless, no for profit entity is going to hobble itself in a such a risky manner. As it stands that contract is "We the media company can do whatever we like, and you can jump off a bridge". It is possible for user outrage to change the media companies behavior, but when there are no valid alternatives because of network effects, companies will commonly say they are going to change to placate quell the masses, and then do nothing because the users will remain on the site anyway. Many places have tried compete against Reddit, but mostly under the 'no moderation' banner in which the sites become a toxic hell hole. As of so far 'better moderation' has not been a motivator to get users to shift. Maybe your work will lead people that way.
MonkeyMalarky 4y ago
Is there option for preapproving/hiding comments from new users in a subreddit? I'm thinking of a certain regional politics sub where on the main page, you'll see XX number of replies, open the thread and it be completely empty for a couple hours.
- Scharkenberg 4y ago
  Automoderator can be manually configured to perform actions on posts and comments that fit certain criteria, though as far as I know, it's not as extensive as, say, a bot that one would program themselves and tailor the needs of their own subreddit. There is also the "approved users" feature [1], but it requires manual intervention for every particular user, and I am not sure whether it practically serves any purpose in public subreddits. Reddit claims it does, but when we tested it a few years ago, it did not work correctly. In any case, I do not recommend it for public subreddits with more than 1k daily users. [1] https://mods.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/360009164452 https://mods.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/360009164452
  - rhaksw 4y ago
    That's nothing. There are far more powerful removal tools than automoderator these days, and that was already very dystopian itself. See: https://www.reddit.com/r/reveddit/comments/sxpk15/fyi_my_thoughts_on_the_new_true_block_and_the/ https://www.reddit.com/r/reveddit/comments/sxpk15/fyi_my_tho...
    - Scharkenberg 4y ago
      Hmm, doesn't seem very flexible, so it's not of much use to our subreddit. No wonder no mod has bothered to turn it on.
      - rhaksw 4y ago
        > no mod has bothered to turn it on. Glad to hear it. Some of this, such as the way user blocks now work, isn't controlled by mods.
tgsovlerkhgsel 4y ago
Subs definitely can make your content in that sub (including everything you post in that sub) disappear in a way that isn't just "without explanation", but explicitly in a way that makes it appear as still online to you to make it harder for you to notice. As the demo OP provided demonstrates. As far as I know this is not a feature Reddit officially provides, but creative (ab)use of the spam filter, moderation queue, or similar features, which reddit doesn't effectively prevent.
- rhaksw 4y ago
  > As far as I know this is not a feature Reddit officially provides No, it's provided by Reddit and is in the docs, > With a bot ban, some users won't realize they've been banned. [1] There are several more dystopian features built atop shadow removals [2], each of which multiplies the number of impacted users by 10x or more. Social media sites are constantly building more and more powerful tooling for moderators to more easily remove more content as userbases get more and more riled up. The ability to disagree with words online is being shrouded in darkness, and it won't stop until we start applying transparency that can provide openings to see what's been hidden from us. [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/AutoModerator/wiki/library#wiki_user_bot_ban_list https://www.reddit.com/r/AutoModerator/wiki/library#wiki_use... [2] https://www.reddit.com/r/reveddit/comments/sxpk15/fyi_my_thoughts_on_the_new_true_block_and_the/ https://www.reddit.com/r/reveddit/comments/sxpk15/fyi_my_tho...
rhaksw 4y ago
> Subs cannot "shadowban" users themselves. They can. It's now called a "bot ban" and used to be called a shadow ban. It's done by adding a user's name to the sub's Automoderator configuration. > With a bot ban, some users won't realize they've been banned. [1] There is more explanation on Reveddit's FAQ under What is a shadowban? [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/AutoModerator/wiki/library#wiki_user_bot_ban_list https://www.reddit.com/r/AutoModerator/wiki/library#wiki_use... [2] https://www.reveddit.com/about/faq/#shadowban https://www.reveddit.com/about/faq/#shadowban
nullc 4y ago
> Subs cannot "shadowban" users themselves. That's not technically true, they can set an automod regexp to match the comments and set them for review and then fail to approve them. The comments are effectively shadowbanned. Automod rules are flexible enough to direct it at specific users, classes of users (e.g. new or low karma), or keywords in the posts.

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...
- pixl97 4y ago
  >In the real world, we do not throw criminals in jail Again, you seem to be very confused about private property. Think of it as a civil action, which at least in US law, that is operated under a completely different set of books and assumptions. For example I can tell you to leave my properly in a civil action without any explanation why. If you come back a criminal charge can be presented against you. Much like a business can remove its patrons at will for (nearly, civil rights apply) any reason they can be negatively impacted if and when they do this to too many people and the patronage stops coming, you still don't have any legal right to their property.
  - rhaksw 4y ago
    You must be trolling, haha, there was more to my quote! We do throw criminals in jail, the point was we don't do it without making a public record of how and why. That was an analogy that you've taken completely out of context and on another tangent.
    - pixl97 4y ago
      While I do think your work is interesting indeed, and needs to be done to examine the problems at hand, and my replies may be unintentionally harsh towards you, there has been a general trend where many users think they have a right to an audience. This presidence doesn't exist without contract, and the contract in social media heavily biased in the direction of the media as the user is only indirectly paying for the service. As you've stated in this thread, an involuntary contract between the government, the media company, and the user are not optimal as it tends to give more power to political entities. Voluntary contracts between the business and non-paying users are seemingly just as worthless, no for profit entity is going to hobble itself in a such a risky manner. As it stands that contract is "We the media company can do whatever we like, and you can jump off a bridge". It is possible for user outrage to change the media companies behavior, but when there are no valid alternatives because of network effects, companies will commonly say they are going to change to placate quell the masses, and then do nothing because the users will remain on the site anyway. Many places have tried compete against Reddit, but mostly under the 'no moderation' banner in which the sites become a toxic hell hole. As of so far 'better moderation' has not been a motivator to get users to shift. Maybe your work will lead people that way.

MonkeyMalarky 4y ago

Is there option for preapproving/hiding comments from new users in a subreddit? I'm thinking of a certain regional politics sub where on the main page, you'll see XX number of replies, open the thread and it be completely empty for a couple hours.

Scharkenberg 4y ago
Automoderator can be manually configured to perform actions on posts and comments that fit certain criteria, though as far as I know, it's not as extensive as, say, a bot that one would program themselves and tailor the needs of their own subreddit. There is also the "approved users" feature [1], but it requires manual intervention for every particular user, and I am not sure whether it practically serves any purpose in public subreddits. Reddit claims it does, but when we tested it a few years ago, it did not work correctly. In any case, I do not recommend it for public subreddits with more than 1k daily users. [1] https://mods.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/360009164452 https://mods.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/360009164452
- rhaksw 4y ago
  That's nothing. There are far more powerful removal tools than automoderator these days, and that was already very dystopian itself. See: https://www.reddit.com/r/reveddit/comments/sxpk15/fyi_my_thoughts_on_the_new_true_block_and_the/ https://www.reddit.com/r/reveddit/comments/sxpk15/fyi_my_tho...
  - Scharkenberg 4y ago
    Hmm, doesn't seem very flexible, so it's not of much use to our subreddit. No wonder no mod has bothered to turn it on.
    - rhaksw 4y ago
      > no mod has bothered to turn it on. Glad to hear it. Some of this, such as the way user blocks now work, isn't controlled by mods.

tgsovlerkhgsel 4y ago

Subs definitely can make your content in that sub (including everything you post in that sub) disappear in a way that isn't just "without explanation", but explicitly in a way that makes it appear as still online to you to make it harder for you to notice. As the demo OP provided demonstrates. As far as I know this is not a feature Reddit officially provides, but creative (ab)use of the spam filter, moderation queue, or similar features, which reddit doesn't effectively prevent.

rhaksw 4y ago
> As far as I know this is not a feature Reddit officially provides No, it's provided by Reddit and is in the docs, > With a bot ban, some users won't realize they've been banned. [1] There are several more dystopian features built atop shadow removals [2], each of which multiplies the number of impacted users by 10x or more. Social media sites are constantly building more and more powerful tooling for moderators to more easily remove more content as userbases get more and more riled up. The ability to disagree with words online is being shrouded in darkness, and it won't stop until we start applying transparency that can provide openings to see what's been hidden from us. [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/AutoModerator/wiki/library#wiki_user_bot_ban_list https://www.reddit.com/r/AutoModerator/wiki/library#wiki_use... [2] https://www.reddit.com/r/reveddit/comments/sxpk15/fyi_my_thoughts_on_the_new_true_block_and_the/ https://www.reddit.com/r/reveddit/comments/sxpk15/fyi_my_tho...

rhaksw 4y ago

> Subs cannot "shadowban" users themselves. They can. It's now called a "bot ban" and used to be called a shadow ban. It's done by adding a user's name to the sub's Automoderator configuration. > With a bot ban, some users won't realize they've been banned. [1] There is more explanation on Reveddit's FAQ under What is a shadowban? [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/AutoModerator/wiki/library#wiki_user_bot_ban_list https://www.reddit.com/r/AutoModerator/wiki/library#wiki_use... [2] https://www.reveddit.com/about/faq/#shadowban https://www.reveddit.com/about/faq/#shadowban

nullc 4y ago

> Subs cannot "shadowban" users themselves. That's not technically true, they can set an automod regexp to match the comments and set them for review and then fail to approve them. The comments are effectively shadowbanned. Automod rules are flexible enough to direct it at specific users, classes of users (e.g. new or low karma), or keywords in the posts.