5 ms·

> so you know clearly if you’ve been shadowbanned A shadowban that the user clearly knows about sounds like an oxymoron.

h11h 4y ago
I assumed shadow banning was invented for forums to hide low quality users without giving them a signal to create a new account.
- Zuiii 4y ago
  But when they do eventually figure it out, they end up hoping from one newly created account to another. Unless using new accounts are prohibitively expensive, and they usually aren't, then you'll end up just replacing one problem with another. The correct way to moderate is to be civil and treat "low quality" users as human beings. Reserve inhuman bans for inhuman users (bots).
  - epakai 4y ago
    Ban evasion was a thing long before shadow bans. I've seen persistent users disrupt IRC channels for years, maybe decades. You can't reason with or befriend somebody who holds a grudge that long. Moderators will just have to deal with the problem repeatedly. Shadow bans at least minimize recurrence by taking away the immediate feedback.
    - somenameforme 4y ago
      IRC generally has no barriers to account registration while Twitter generally requires a phone number. In the former bans are meaningless, in the latter they pose in an insurmountable hurdle to all but organized and funded campaigns. The real problem with shadowbans is "us" - humans. Shadowbans are a great tool for helping to minimize the impact of things like literal spammers and scammers, but it's also a tool that's great for minimizing political dissent, creating false impressions of the popularity (or not) of various concepts, or generally grossly manipulating and distorting public discourse. As public online discourse becomes a more engrained part of normal society, shadowbans may even end up being an action that, in and of itself, end up being regulated and controlled. Shadowbans can help create a better and freer society for everybody, but they can also be used to create a dystopia. In some ways it's akin to a real world weapon. A firearm can be used to uphold and protected great values, but it can also be used to impose horrific ones.
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
      - XorNot 4y ago
        > IRC generally has no barriers to account registration while Twitter generally requires a phone number. in the latter they pose in an insurmountable hurdle to all but organized and funded campaigns. Since when is getting a new phone number that receive SMS an insurmountable expensive? There are literally dozens, perhaps hundreds of services selling this. Example [1] https://www.textmagic.com/sms-pricing/ https://www.textmagic.com/sms-pricing/ seems to cost me 7c per text received with no account fees, and I only need it to receive a sign up message. That is far from "organized and funded". People paid $8 to make troll accounts on Twitter when it was possible.
        rsync 4y ago
        Just to clarify … You are correct that burning a SIM card is not that expensive. However, your example of a text capable VOIP number is not a good one. FAANGs require a real mobile number and these texting services (twilio, for instance) will not work. All of this to say: It’s a bit more expensive than you think. If you really care about succeeding, you’re going to need to burn a SIM card.
  - fzeroracer 4y ago
    What do you do when those 'low quality' users are sending rape threats to specific users? Or stalking them in this scenario? The police aren't going to do anything because it's barely an actionable threat and hard to trace. The entire reason shadowbans exist and have existed for decades is because there's an inherently unsolvable problem with certain users that extremely fixate on certain users or communities. If you think they can be treated by being civil then I don't think you've been a moderator for any extensive period.
remarkEon 4y ago
I’m not sure I agree. Perhaps it’s an issue with the definition of “shadowban”, but I understood it to mean “you tweet, but no one sees”. Letting a user know that their account is in this state for this_reason actually seems like an improvement to me, not an oxymoron.
- dmamills 4y ago
  It's your definition that is misunderstood, not the oxymoron. > Shadow banning, also called stealth banning, hellbanning, ghost banning or comment ghosting, is the practice of blocking or partially blocking a user or the user's content from some areas of an online community in such a way that the ban is not readily apparent to the user https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadow_banning https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadow_banning
  - remarkEon 4y ago
    Okay. I guess I'm saying that I think it's dumb when you don't tell the user that their account is in this state.
    - tasuki 4y ago
      Why?
    - nickthegreek 4y ago
      HN doesnt tell you the state of your account. In fact, I don't know of any service that says that they do.
    - HDThoreaun 4y ago
      That's the whole point though. Otherwise they'll just make a new account.
- XorNot 4y ago
  Letting a user know defeats the point of doing it (also, this is not what Twitter is doing). The point of shadowbans/hellbans as they exist on say, reddit, is to deal with what would be termed criminally as a fixated person. If they know they're banned, they just make a new account, and another one after that, and another one - if they think they can't post they engage in ever more extreme measures to keep doing it. A hellban is a solution here, or at least a relief valve because of course this person doesn't actually engage with the community or care to, they're their to grief it: so letting them continue to think they're posting normally while being invisible keeps them occupied until either they lose interest or somehow figure it out. Moderators are a finite resource, and spending all their resources chasing down someone who won't take the hint is exactly what a hellban is for.

h11h 4y ago

I assumed shadow banning was invented for forums to hide low quality users without giving them a signal to create a new account.

Zuiii 4y ago
But when they do eventually figure it out, they end up hoping from one newly created account to another. Unless using new accounts are prohibitively expensive, and they usually aren't, then you'll end up just replacing one problem with another. The correct way to moderate is to be civil and treat "low quality" users as human beings. Reserve inhuman bans for inhuman users (bots).
- epakai 4y ago
  Ban evasion was a thing long before shadow bans. I've seen persistent users disrupt IRC channels for years, maybe decades. You can't reason with or befriend somebody who holds a grudge that long. Moderators will just have to deal with the problem repeatedly. Shadow bans at least minimize recurrence by taking away the immediate feedback.
  - somenameforme 4y ago
    IRC generally has no barriers to account registration while Twitter generally requires a phone number. In the former bans are meaningless, in the latter they pose in an insurmountable hurdle to all but organized and funded campaigns. The real problem with shadowbans is "us" - humans. Shadowbans are a great tool for helping to minimize the impact of things like literal spammers and scammers, but it's also a tool that's great for minimizing political dissent, creating false impressions of the popularity (or not) of various concepts, or generally grossly manipulating and distorting public discourse. As public online discourse becomes a more engrained part of normal society, shadowbans may even end up being an action that, in and of itself, end up being regulated and controlled. Shadowbans can help create a better and freer society for everybody, but they can also be used to create a dystopia. In some ways it's akin to a real world weapon. A firearm can be used to uphold and protected great values, but it can also be used to impose horrific ones.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - XorNot 4y ago
      > IRC generally has no barriers to account registration while Twitter generally requires a phone number. in the latter they pose in an insurmountable hurdle to all but organized and funded campaigns. Since when is getting a new phone number that receive SMS an insurmountable expensive? There are literally dozens, perhaps hundreds of services selling this. Example [1] https://www.textmagic.com/sms-pricing/ https://www.textmagic.com/sms-pricing/ seems to cost me 7c per text received with no account fees, and I only need it to receive a sign up message. That is far from "organized and funded". People paid $8 to make troll accounts on Twitter when it was possible.
      - rsync 4y ago
        Just to clarify … You are correct that burning a SIM card is not that expensive. However, your example of a text capable VOIP number is not a good one. FAANGs require a real mobile number and these texting services (twilio, for instance) will not work. All of this to say: It’s a bit more expensive than you think. If you really care about succeeding, you’re going to need to burn a SIM card.
- fzeroracer 4y ago
  What do you do when those 'low quality' users are sending rape threats to specific users? Or stalking them in this scenario? The police aren't going to do anything because it's barely an actionable threat and hard to trace. The entire reason shadowbans exist and have existed for decades is because there's an inherently unsolvable problem with certain users that extremely fixate on certain users or communities. If you think they can be treated by being civil then I don't think you've been a moderator for any extensive period.

remarkEon 4y ago

I’m not sure I agree. Perhaps it’s an issue with the definition of “shadowban”, but I understood it to mean “you tweet, but no one sees”. Letting a user know that their account is in this state for this_reason actually seems like an improvement to me, not an oxymoron.

dmamills 4y ago
It's your definition that is misunderstood, not the oxymoron. > Shadow banning, also called stealth banning, hellbanning, ghost banning or comment ghosting, is the practice of blocking or partially blocking a user or the user's content from some areas of an online community in such a way that the ban is not readily apparent to the user https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadow_banning https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadow_banning
- remarkEon 4y ago
  Okay. I guess I'm saying that I think it's dumb when you don't tell the user that their account is in this state.
  - tasuki 4y ago
    Why?
  - nickthegreek 4y ago
    HN doesnt tell you the state of your account. In fact, I don't know of any service that says that they do.
  - HDThoreaun 4y ago
    That's the whole point though. Otherwise they'll just make a new account.
XorNot 4y ago
Letting a user know defeats the point of doing it (also, this is not what Twitter is doing). The point of shadowbans/hellbans as they exist on say, reddit, is to deal with what would be termed criminally as a fixated person. If they know they're banned, they just make a new account, and another one after that, and another one - if they think they can't post they engage in ever more extreme measures to keep doing it. A hellban is a solution here, or at least a relief valve because of course this person doesn't actually engage with the community or care to, they're their to grief it: so letting them continue to think they're posting normally while being invisible keeps them occupied until either they lose interest or somehow figure it out. Moderators are a finite resource, and spending all their resources chasing down someone who won't take the hint is exactly what a hellban is for.