5 ms·
I have been on HN ~5yrs and only like last week I started getting an auto-ban of sorts about "you are posting too fast" even when I post ~15min+ between posts a
by _8j50 4y ago
I have been on HN ~5yrs and only like last week I started getting an auto-ban of sorts about "you are posting too fast" even when I post ~15min+ between posts and then it takes something like 6-24 hours (haven't kept trying to measure it) to reset. Been meaning to do ask hn post about this but that counts against my daily allowance of like two posts (hope this one makes it lol).
I think moderation (in general not at HN specifically) should be transparent, truthful and measured. But at the same time, if you don't pay to use a site you have no say in how it is operated.
I would like to know if I said things that are not welcome at hn? Or perhaps I broke rules without knowing it? I try my best to be reapectful and kind to others but I also do get angry at some posts and let emotion get the best of me sometimes. But if I did something unacceptable I cannot stop doing it unless I am told what that thing is, so shadowbans work against the moderator's interests if the moderated subject is being cooperative.
At HN: the decision to allow political and controversial non-technical posts also means accepting undesirable or controversial views (even if they get downvotes) else you are just creating an echo chamber of ideas. I had a post where every hour or so when I checked it goes upvote then down vote all day long because it was controversial I guess but I thought I simply had a strong opinion on a subject instead of being hostile or posting something irrelevant or invaluable to the discussion when I started noticing the restriction.
But like I said, I have no qualms on any moderation decisions on a free to access site. But also, I am very supportive of solutions to scale moderation. I really think paid human moderators can be scaled for many online communities and social networks.
Why isn't FB hiring people for $12+/hr to moderate stuff? The idea that it is either humans or ML as opposed to humans working with ML is silly. Or maybe they are already doing that at major social networks. I always wondered why reddit for example doesn't allow subreddit members to have paid subscriptions to support moderators.
- andsoitis 4y ago> Why isn't FB hiring people for $12+/hr to moderate stuff? FB does employ humans moderators, with great mental toll apparently: https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-57088382 https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-57088382
- _8j50 4y agoHaving done customer support, I think moderation would be a lot easier because you don't have people screaming at you all shift. But otoh, I bet they deal with a lot of disgusting stuff.
- dredmorbius 4y agoIf the mods are lucky, the content isn't directed at them (though often it can be, either directly to known mods or to an unknown / anonymous mod team). And the depths to which some people can go are pretty awful. I've only had modest experience with this myself, but have memories well over a decade out, from a site that would be small by today's standards.
- manuelmoreale 4y agoTwo questions for you, if you don't mind me asking: > But at the same time, if you don't pay to use a site you have no say in how it is operated. Is your expectation that if you were a paid coustomer then you'd have a say in how a site is operated? I'm genuinly curious because never in my life I held this expectation when it comes to services I pay for. > I really think paid human moderators can be scaled for many online communities and social networks. You think is possible that a major issue is, in fact, the scale? For example, you mentioned reddit. What if there was a hard cap for the size of a community? What if you design a site to forcefully stay under a certain size? Would that help in your opinion?