3 ms·

Shadow banning was not built to deal with bots. The practice was popularized in various communities long before bots were a serious problem. It was built to de

Shadow banning was not built to deal with bots. The practice was popularized in various communities long before bots were a serious problem. It was built to deal with jerks who, when moderated, would sign up under a new account, or would repost the same content over and over again, or who would invade discussions, distract them with vitriol or out of context nonsense – even if each post as original. The whole point of the concept was that the jerks would FEEL like they were contributing to the discussion, but maybe being ignored, while maintain a static history or login that made it easier to moderate them.

BizarroLand 4y ago
I think that might have been its original purpose, but I can't help but believe that this is evil. People are quick to jump to the "It's their website, they don't have to do anything yada yada" but there is an implied social contract between the users and the owners that for whatever tier of service (free, paid, ad-supported, whatever) you are using you will receive an equal amount and quality of service as every other user on the platform. I'm not against moderation, I'm against secret moderation that wastes the time of other people's lives. Just be forthright and tell people they are muted but can still participate.
rhaksw 4y ago
Platforms say it's for spam [1], which most people interpret to mean bots. I've never seen a platform provide an explanation like the one you give here. [1] https://old.reddit.com/r/TheoryOfReddit/comments/8k5qh3/if_you_created_a_reddittype_website_would_you/dz568o7/?context=3 https://old.reddit.com/r/TheoryOfReddit/comments/8k5qh3/if_y...
- etchalon 4y ago
  You can look up the Wikipedia article on the practice: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadow_banning https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadow_banning It has a fairly rich history, and evolution, as well as counter-measures, and counter-counter-measures and counter-counter-counter-measures.
  - rhaksw 4y ago
    That article barely scratches the surface of what's going on. Reddit alone has tons of secretive ways to remove or hide content, some of which I list here [1]. Others I mention in my talk [2]. [1] 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... [2] https://cantsayanything.win/2022-10-transparent-moderation/ https://cantsayanything.win/2022-10-transparent-moderation/
    - etchalon 4y ago
      I'm talking about the origination and evolution of a specific practice, called, specifically, "shadow banning". Yes, other techniques exist. Sometimes people, being imprecise, ignorant and/or lazy, call those techniques "shadow banning", but that isn't what they are.
      - rhaksw 4y ago
        > Sometimes people, being imprecise, ignorant and/or lazy, call those techniques "shadow banning", but that isn't what they are. What umbrella term would you use for moderator actions that are kept secret from the author of the content? "Moderation" on its own can be secret or transparent, so by itself isn't an apt description.
        deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]

BizarroLand 4y ago

I think that might have been its original purpose, but I can't help but believe that this is evil. People are quick to jump to the "It's their website, they don't have to do anything yada yada" but there is an implied social contract between the users and the owners that for whatever tier of service (free, paid, ad-supported, whatever) you are using you will receive an equal amount and quality of service as every other user on the platform. I'm not against moderation, I'm against secret moderation that wastes the time of other people's lives. Just be forthright and tell people they are muted but can still participate.

rhaksw 4y ago

Platforms say it's for spam [1], which most people interpret to mean bots. I've never seen a platform provide an explanation like the one you give here. [1] https://old.reddit.com/r/TheoryOfReddit/comments/8k5qh3/if_you_created_a_reddittype_website_would_you/dz568o7/?context=3 https://old.reddit.com/r/TheoryOfReddit/comments/8k5qh3/if_y...

etchalon 4y ago
You can look up the Wikipedia article on the practice: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadow_banning https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadow_banning It has a fairly rich history, and evolution, as well as counter-measures, and counter-counter-measures and counter-counter-counter-measures.
- rhaksw 4y ago
  That article barely scratches the surface of what's going on. Reddit alone has tons of secretive ways to remove or hide content, some of which I list here [1]. Others I mention in my talk [2]. [1] 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... [2] https://cantsayanything.win/2022-10-transparent-moderation/ https://cantsayanything.win/2022-10-transparent-moderation/
  - etchalon 4y ago
    I'm talking about the origination and evolution of a specific practice, called, specifically, "shadow banning". Yes, other techniques exist. Sometimes people, being imprecise, ignorant and/or lazy, call those techniques "shadow banning", but that isn't what they are.
    - rhaksw 4y ago
      > Sometimes people, being imprecise, ignorant and/or lazy, call those techniques "shadow banning", but that isn't what they are. What umbrella term would you use for moderator actions that are kept secret from the author of the content? "Moderation" on its own can be secret or transparent, so by itself isn't an apt description.
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]