5 ms·

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 we

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...
- mhuffman 4y ago
  I agree with your stronger opinion and have for a while since I read [1] (he was calling it hell-banning but foresaw the same problems that emerged) One problem I see with your end-goal of changing moderation tools for a better (and more open and honest) social platform experience is that you will have to use them to do it. You have already documented the problem with this -- they can shadow-ban you like anyone else! Even more, if the top-brass decides they don't like it they could just totally ban you or mention of reveddit from the entire platform. And it appears that they do like this power, even if it is the censorship that is creating the toxic elements of it because pretty much every one of them uses it. And there is, as you mentioned, a legitimate use for it. So they would have to be convinced to spend resources on changing something that they want and already works for them and in a sense "taking away power" from people that have it now which is always difficult. So there seems to be a nearly insurmountable chicken and egg issue with making real change, short of convincing someone with vast resources or someone with vast reach to get involved. Alternatively, your plan of using the toxicity of this censorship to build up enough of a group to make noticeable noise seems to be about the only realistic way. You mentioned doing video shorts like Cheyenne, which can get some notice. Although I suspect her or someone like her might make a much larger initial impact then you just starting out and you may never get traction considering the vast amount of content there. I suspect too, that even with the videos you would have to thread the needle by combing through and picking out particularly egregious abuses of shadow-banning to avoid having people associate you, the project, or any associated group with any controversial subjects. Another idea (of working within the system) might be to get volunteers to directly DM people that have had comments and posts shadow-banned, show them the shocking proof on reveddit, and see if they might be recruited to a sub or discord dedicated to making changes or support in some other way even if it is a mention or hashtag etc. From there more discussion and opportunities for growth might emerge. It is possible this could even be automated to start. One last subjective thought is that this could have an out-sized attraction for people that are libertarians due to the censorship component of it. Libertarians are very ... diverse ... politically, and so if you have some initial traction you might wind up having to "eat your own dogfood" by using your ideas concerning moderation to deal with particularly "hot" topics and people to keep the project/goal on course. I am interested in this and would like to think about it some more. What is the best way to stay in touch? [1]https://blog.codinghorror.com/suspension-ban-or-hellban/ https://blog.codinghorror.com/suspension-ban-or-hellban/

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...

mhuffman 4y ago
I agree with your stronger opinion and have for a while since I read [1] (he was calling it hell-banning but foresaw the same problems that emerged) One problem I see with your end-goal of changing moderation tools for a better (and more open and honest) social platform experience is that you will have to use them to do it. You have already documented the problem with this -- they can shadow-ban you like anyone else! Even more, if the top-brass decides they don't like it they could just totally ban you or mention of reveddit from the entire platform. And it appears that they do like this power, even if it is the censorship that is creating the toxic elements of it because pretty much every one of them uses it. And there is, as you mentioned, a legitimate use for it. So they would have to be convinced to spend resources on changing something that they want and already works for them and in a sense "taking away power" from people that have it now which is always difficult. So there seems to be a nearly insurmountable chicken and egg issue with making real change, short of convincing someone with vast resources or someone with vast reach to get involved. Alternatively, your plan of using the toxicity of this censorship to build up enough of a group to make noticeable noise seems to be about the only realistic way. You mentioned doing video shorts like Cheyenne, which can get some notice. Although I suspect her or someone like her might make a much larger initial impact then you just starting out and you may never get traction considering the vast amount of content there. I suspect too, that even with the videos you would have to thread the needle by combing through and picking out particularly egregious abuses of shadow-banning to avoid having people associate you, the project, or any associated group with any controversial subjects. Another idea (of working within the system) might be to get volunteers to directly DM people that have had comments and posts shadow-banned, show them the shocking proof on reveddit, and see if they might be recruited to a sub or discord dedicated to making changes or support in some other way even if it is a mention or hashtag etc. From there more discussion and opportunities for growth might emerge. It is possible this could even be automated to start. One last subjective thought is that this could have an out-sized attraction for people that are libertarians due to the censorship component of it. Libertarians are very ... diverse ... politically, and so if you have some initial traction you might wind up having to "eat your own dogfood" by using your ideas concerning moderation to deal with particularly "hot" topics and people to keep the project/goal on course. I am interested in this and would like to think about it some more. What is the best way to stay in touch? [1]https://blog.codinghorror.com/suspension-ban-or-hellban/ https://blog.codinghorror.com/suspension-ban-or-hellban/