3 ms·

How about we take this opportunity to go back to the old internet to a time where real free speech ruled. Remember how reddit started off, where ANYTHING went n

How about we take this opportunity to go back to the old internet to a time where real free speech ruled. Remember how reddit started off, where ANYTHING went no matter what (as long as it was legal)? Do people have the courage for that anymore? I certainly do, and I'd love to hear from those who disagree in complete free speech for the next Reddit.

russdill 3y ago
It's important, but so is community building. Most communities function best when there's some degree of moderation. For example, people would prefer that the speech in their bird watching community is limited and trolls are kept out. Putting up with abrasive behavior in your community isn't brave, it's just masochistic. It is true that some communities on Reddit weren't possible because they were not permitted to allow some of the content they were allowing.
- TheCaptain4815 3y ago
  You can make the community building tools so much more powerful too! If people want to make a bird community and ban all pro-hawk posters, that's perfectly fine. The issue's are around the secrecy in administration. How about adding the following: - Removing shadowbans - Allow users to see all deleted comments if they opt in - Allow users to see all banned accounts/reasons they got banned. Imagine a page for each subreddit which includes a list of banned/removed comments. It would be quite telling on the moderation if that list was mostly non-spam disagreements. How about including an internet "Bill of Rights" for free speech, illogical arguments, etc to try and help guide the flow of discussion, similar to how /pol/ has this in their rules - https://i.4cdn.org/pol/1493993226750.jpg https://i.4cdn.org/pol/1493993226750.jpg
  - russdill 3y ago
    So you'd like to make communities more free by regulating them more?
    - TheCaptain4815 3y ago
      Nothing in there would be regulating them, just more transparency so users can see who gets banned and whether or not they want to view deleted comments. I'd probably turn off deleted comments in a r/games subreddit but would 100% have them on for a political subreddit for example.
rkangel 3y ago
I have come to understand that due to rhe paradox of tolerance some form of moderation is absolutely necessary for the long term health of a community: "The paradox of tolerance states that if a society is tolerant without limit, its ability to be tolerant is eventually seized or destroyed by the intolerant." https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance Another way to frame it in terms of moderation is "in order to maintain open tolerance, we must be intolerant of intolerance". Ironically it was a Reddit thread that helped me understand that tolerance is a social contract: once one side breaks it, we need not be tolerant of them any more.
Zak 3y ago
When you're the less moderated alternative to a popular platform, you end up with a huge fraction of the users who got banned from that platform. For the most part, average people do not want to talk to the people who get banned from mainstream platforms. People who post images of children in bikinis described as jailbait are creepy. People who advocate political violence are scary. People who share shock content are disgusting. Perhaps you don't make exactly those value judgments, but most people do. They will avoid your platform because it's full of people they don't want to talk to or hear from.

russdill 3y ago

It's important, but so is community building. Most communities function best when there's some degree of moderation. For example, people would prefer that the speech in their bird watching community is limited and trolls are kept out. Putting up with abrasive behavior in your community isn't brave, it's just masochistic. It is true that some communities on Reddit weren't possible because they were not permitted to allow some of the content they were allowing.

TheCaptain4815 3y ago
You can make the community building tools so much more powerful too! If people want to make a bird community and ban all pro-hawk posters, that's perfectly fine. The issue's are around the secrecy in administration. How about adding the following: - Removing shadowbans - Allow users to see all deleted comments if they opt in - Allow users to see all banned accounts/reasons they got banned. Imagine a page for each subreddit which includes a list of banned/removed comments. It would be quite telling on the moderation if that list was mostly non-spam disagreements. How about including an internet "Bill of Rights" for free speech, illogical arguments, etc to try and help guide the flow of discussion, similar to how /pol/ has this in their rules - https://i.4cdn.org/pol/1493993226750.jpg https://i.4cdn.org/pol/1493993226750.jpg
- russdill 3y ago
  So you'd like to make communities more free by regulating them more?
  - TheCaptain4815 3y ago
    Nothing in there would be regulating them, just more transparency so users can see who gets banned and whether or not they want to view deleted comments. I'd probably turn off deleted comments in a r/games subreddit but would 100% have them on for a political subreddit for example.

rkangel 3y ago

I have come to understand that due to rhe paradox of tolerance some form of moderation is absolutely necessary for the long term health of a community: "The paradox of tolerance states that if a society is tolerant without limit, its ability to be tolerant is eventually seized or destroyed by the intolerant." https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance Another way to frame it in terms of moderation is "in order to maintain open tolerance, we must be intolerant of intolerance". Ironically it was a Reddit thread that helped me understand that tolerance is a social contract: once one side breaks it, we need not be tolerant of them any more.

Zak 3y ago

When you're the less moderated alternative to a popular platform, you end up with a huge fraction of the users who got banned from that platform. For the most part, average people do not want to talk to the people who get banned from mainstream platforms. People who post images of children in bikinis described as jailbait are creepy. People who advocate political violence are scary. People who share shock content are disgusting. Perhaps you don't make exactly those value judgments, but most people do. They will avoid your platform because it's full of people they don't want to talk to or hear from.