4 ms·

Appreciate the anti-censorship stance in theory, but involving cryptocurrencies and hoping that AI some day fixes all your discoverability issues are pretty big

by bhaney 3y ago

Appreciate the anti-censorship stance in theory, but involving cryptocurrencies and hoping that AI some day fixes all your discoverability issues are pretty big red flags to me. And most importantly: Front page is entirely spam = I am not going to use your site

humanistbot 3y ago
Do you not see the irony in your comment? You are anti-censorship, but complain the front page is entirely spam. Sounds like you use 'censorship' to describe moderation of content you like, and 'spam' to describe content that you don't like. You tell the creator that you are not going to use the site because they haven't censored content you don't want to see.
- afavour 3y ago
  Right, this is exactly the dilemma facing pretty much any site of this nature. Some level of censorship is required otherwise the site will be unusable but exactly how much is “right” is an endless debate.
  - dylkil 3y ago
    You can offer censorship to users who want it, everything stays up but some people dont see it
    - giantrobot 3y ago
      Then someone on your ignore list starts posting all sorts of false/defamatory comments about you with know way for you to ever see it. You have no idea what's happening but your reputation is turned to shit. It's a reverse shadow ban and just about as broken.
      - dylkil 3y ago
        thats a bit of a stretch
- hatsunearu 3y ago
  I'm pretty sure curated content (whether via an editor or via voting) is substantially identical to just moderation (i.e. "censorship")
- bhaney 3y ago
  > Do you not see the irony in your comment? Of course I do? I'm well aware that the spam is obviously a direct result of the lack of any content moderation, in the name of anti-censorship. I can oppose censorship as a general concept while also acknowledging that it's difficult (or maybe impossible) to build publicly accessible Internet communities that are of high quality in their discussion while also being resistant to censorship. Recognizing that doesn't mean I have to stop supporting attempts to make them play nicely.
  - malermeister 3y ago
    The issue here is that "spam" is subjective. What might be spam to you, might not be spam to somebody super religious or with a very different world view;like a communist vs a silicon valley vc.
    - afavour 3y ago
      Pretty sure OP is aware of that too. Not sure why everyone is talking to them as if they’re clueless.
- hanniabu 3y ago
  Moderation is not the same as censorship
JSavageOne 3y ago
What is your specific objection to the cryptocurrency feature of this site? Or are you just dogmatically anti-crypto for emotional reasons? If the latter, well that's exactly what I was criticizing about HN ("it can sometimes randomly be very hostile/toxic to new tech, the most glaring example being crypto.") and so the site is probably not for you anyways. HN is better for anti-crypto. The ML stuff was just throwing some ideas out there for the future. Regarding the spam, apologies on that. I posted this before going to sleep, and woke up to see the spam. This is just a side project and I didn't implement any automated spam moderation yet or assign any mods.
- sitkack 3y ago
  I am often at dissonance with the HN hive mind and thus I find myself delighted by your post, I think it expands on what is out there. I think being able to reward post authors with something of value vs platform specific "coins" is excellent. People should be compensated for their work. I also think that ML can and will play an important role in intermediating human discussion. From preventing flamewars and personal attacks to detecting logical fallacies. Reddit isn't good, it is just the one of the best things we have right now in terms of audience and breadth of subject matter. It is basically AOL+Usenet without the advantages of Usenet. Having posts and tags doesn't make it a Reddit replacement, because a lot of what reddit is about is specific subs about a particular topic. Sure, you can find that hyperplane of folks that like the same tag, etc. But that doesn't seem to work. Lobsters [1] is also that HN/Reddit alternative and while it has a large subscriber count, it doesn't have the discussion volume. One of the biggest problems with all of sosh-meeds is that it is designed to a constant stream of ephemeral distractions to engage eyeballs to see ads. The static viewer, river of artifacts that we drop hot takes on for forum points is what needs to get replaced. I think you are on to something, but it looks more like a link aggregator with comments than a forum to build discussions around topics. https://lobste.rs/ https://lobste.rs/

by bhaney 3y ago

humanistbot 3y ago

Do you not see the irony in your comment? You are anti-censorship, but complain the front page is entirely spam. Sounds like you use 'censorship' to describe moderation of content you like, and 'spam' to describe content that you don't like. You tell the creator that you are not going to use the site because they haven't censored content you don't want to see.

afavour 3y ago
Right, this is exactly the dilemma facing pretty much any site of this nature. Some level of censorship is required otherwise the site will be unusable but exactly how much is “right” is an endless debate.
- dylkil 3y ago
  You can offer censorship to users who want it, everything stays up but some people dont see it
  - giantrobot 3y ago
    Then someone on your ignore list starts posting all sorts of false/defamatory comments about you with know way for you to ever see it. You have no idea what's happening but your reputation is turned to shit. It's a reverse shadow ban and just about as broken.
    - dylkil 3y ago
      thats a bit of a stretch
hatsunearu 3y ago
I'm pretty sure curated content (whether via an editor or via voting) is substantially identical to just moderation (i.e. "censorship")
bhaney 3y ago
> Do you not see the irony in your comment? Of course I do? I'm well aware that the spam is obviously a direct result of the lack of any content moderation, in the name of anti-censorship. I can oppose censorship as a general concept while also acknowledging that it's difficult (or maybe impossible) to build publicly accessible Internet communities that are of high quality in their discussion while also being resistant to censorship. Recognizing that doesn't mean I have to stop supporting attempts to make them play nicely.
- malermeister 3y ago
  The issue here is that "spam" is subjective. What might be spam to you, might not be spam to somebody super religious or with a very different world view;like a communist vs a silicon valley vc.
  - afavour 3y ago
    Pretty sure OP is aware of that too. Not sure why everyone is talking to them as if they’re clueless.
hanniabu 3y ago
Moderation is not the same as censorship

JSavageOne 3y ago

What is your specific objection to the cryptocurrency feature of this site? Or are you just dogmatically anti-crypto for emotional reasons? If the latter, well that's exactly what I was criticizing about HN ("it can sometimes randomly be very hostile/toxic to new tech, the most glaring example being crypto.") and so the site is probably not for you anyways. HN is better for anti-crypto. The ML stuff was just throwing some ideas out there for the future. Regarding the spam, apologies on that. I posted this before going to sleep, and woke up to see the spam. This is just a side project and I didn't implement any automated spam moderation yet or assign any mods.

sitkack 3y ago
I am often at dissonance with the HN hive mind and thus I find myself delighted by your post, I think it expands on what is out there. I think being able to reward post authors with something of value vs platform specific "coins" is excellent. People should be compensated for their work. I also think that ML can and will play an important role in intermediating human discussion. From preventing flamewars and personal attacks to detecting logical fallacies. Reddit isn't good, it is just the one of the best things we have right now in terms of audience and breadth of subject matter. It is basically AOL+Usenet without the advantages of Usenet. Having posts and tags doesn't make it a Reddit replacement, because a lot of what reddit is about is specific subs about a particular topic. Sure, you can find that hyperplane of folks that like the same tag, etc. But that doesn't seem to work. Lobsters [1] is also that HN/Reddit alternative and while it has a large subscriber count, it doesn't have the discussion volume. One of the biggest problems with all of sosh-meeds is that it is designed to a constant stream of ephemeral distractions to engage eyeballs to see ads. The static viewer, river of artifacts that we drop hot takes on for forum points is what needs to get replaced. I think you are on to something, but it looks more like a link aggregator with comments than a forum to build discussions around topics. https://lobste.rs/ https://lobste.rs/