3 ms·

There have been plenty of free platforms that have not turned out like that. HN, for example.

by tremon 3y ago

WithinReason 3y ago
Only thanks to heavy moderation.
- shitlord 3y ago
  Yes, but the key difference is that White House staffers aren't personally pressuring dang.
  - unethical_ban 3y ago
    They don't feel the need to, because HN mods do their job and there aren't millions of people spreading verifiable misinformation here unchecked.
    - shitlord 3y ago
      It has nothing to do with the amount of time Dang spends working. It's because the HN userbase is tiny compared to the social media giants. There are many small forums that spread misinformation because they enjoy trolling. The moderators even encourage it. The DOJ and White House do not care about these forums because they collectively have less than 0.1% of Facebook's DAU.
    - artificialLimbs 3y ago
      [citation needed]
      - unethical_ban 3y ago
        You want me to verify that dang hasn't gotten a message from executive agencies? Don't attack me for that assertion, attack the person I responded to. You want me to verify that there aren't coordinated disinformation campaigns festering all over this site? Well, I can read, so I'm fairly confident.
  - RobotToaster 3y ago
    Do we know that for sure?
FeteCommuniste 3y ago
Is HN “free?” How heavy of a hand do the mods have here? (I genuinely don’t know the answer to that question.)
- giraffe_lady 3y ago
  It's very heavy in terms of tone, less in content. Definitely workable for nazis if they're careful. You can advocate eugenics and genocide-lite if you're polite and abstract enough. You're more likely to get in trouble for calling someone a nazi than you are for promoting nazi policies, as long as you don't use any slurs.
  - atlantic 3y ago
    Could you clarify the term "nazis"? Presumably, you don't mean a member of the German National Socialist party, which was dissolved in 1945. But if you mean "people whose views I disagree with", then perhaps you could be a little more specific.
    - giraffe_lady 3y ago
      You notice there how I was specific about "nazi policies" right? It's to avoid a discussion like this one. I don't care about party affiliation per se, I am talking about advocating specific policies and worldviews. Things like ethnonationism, eugenics, categorizing certain minorities as inherently criminal, white natalism: things that, if you could present them to a 1945-style straw nazi they'd say "yup that's us." And all that aside, you know that people still self identify as nazis right? It's not preposterous that they show up here. They have jobs and kids and hobbies and professional aspirations, and if a chance to talk about the degeneracy of society re: immigration comes on the tech forum, hey, they know also how to slide into that conversation without saying anything too crass. And yes, you could elide all that as "people I disagree with" if you're devoted to being particularly sloppy. Because I do disagree with them, and don't want them here? Is that not the case for you?
      - atlantic 3y ago
onion2k 3y ago
HN, for example. HN isn't really a 'platform'. The reach for a post on HN is tiny. There needs to be a critical mass of people before something can really be called a platform. And HN posts are moderated, both by the mod team using their tools, and by the users using flagging and votes. It's quite far from being 'free'. You can say anything you want in theory by it won't remain visible for very long.
Pxtl 3y ago
Dang works very hard to censor this site quite heavily and maintain the kind of discourse he and his team want. As is his right. HN is not a example of libertarian social media.
- tremon 3y ago
  The GP didn't ask for examples of libertarian social media. The GP asked for examples of forums/platforms from a "free society" that had not turned into a cesspool.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
plagiarist 3y ago
Every politicized topic gathers dozens of comments from lunatics who are deliberately ignoring reality. This very week someone on HN told me black people are disproportionately not accepted to colleges because of "genetics." Perhaps HN is on its way.

There have been plenty of free platforms that have not turned out like that. HN, for example.

by tremon 3y ago

There have been plenty of free platforms that have not turned out like that. HN, for example.

WithinReason 3y ago

Only thanks to heavy moderation.

shitlord 3y ago
Yes, but the key difference is that White House staffers aren't personally pressuring dang.
- unethical_ban 3y ago
  They don't feel the need to, because HN mods do their job and there aren't millions of people spreading verifiable misinformation here unchecked.
  - shitlord 3y ago
    It has nothing to do with the amount of time Dang spends working. It's because the HN userbase is tiny compared to the social media giants. There are many small forums that spread misinformation because they enjoy trolling. The moderators even encourage it. The DOJ and White House do not care about these forums because they collectively have less than 0.1% of Facebook's DAU.
  - artificialLimbs 3y ago
    [citation needed]
    - unethical_ban 3y ago
      You want me to verify that dang hasn't gotten a message from executive agencies? Don't attack me for that assertion, attack the person I responded to. You want me to verify that there aren't coordinated disinformation campaigns festering all over this site? Well, I can read, so I'm fairly confident.
- RobotToaster 3y ago
  Do we know that for sure?

FeteCommuniste 3y ago

Is HN “free?” How heavy of a hand do the mods have here? (I genuinely don’t know the answer to that question.)

giraffe_lady 3y ago
It's very heavy in terms of tone, less in content. Definitely workable for nazis if they're careful. You can advocate eugenics and genocide-lite if you're polite and abstract enough. You're more likely to get in trouble for calling someone a nazi than you are for promoting nazi policies, as long as you don't use any slurs.
- atlantic 3y ago
  Could you clarify the term "nazis"? Presumably, you don't mean a member of the German National Socialist party, which was dissolved in 1945. But if you mean "people whose views I disagree with", then perhaps you could be a little more specific.
  - giraffe_lady 3y ago
    You notice there how I was specific about "nazi policies" right? It's to avoid a discussion like this one. I don't care about party affiliation per se, I am talking about advocating specific policies and worldviews. Things like ethnonationism, eugenics, categorizing certain minorities as inherently criminal, white natalism: things that, if you could present them to a 1945-style straw nazi they'd say "yup that's us." And all that aside, you know that people still self identify as nazis right? It's not preposterous that they show up here. They have jobs and kids and hobbies and professional aspirations, and if a chance to talk about the degeneracy of society re: immigration comes on the tech forum, hey, they know also how to slide into that conversation without saying anything too crass. And yes, you could elide all that as "people I disagree with" if you're devoted to being particularly sloppy. Because I do disagree with them, and don't want them here? Is that not the case for you?
    - atlantic 3y ago

onion2k 3y ago

HN, for example. HN isn't really a 'platform'. The reach for a post on HN is tiny. There needs to be a critical mass of people before something can really be called a platform. And HN posts are moderated, both by the mod team using their tools, and by the users using flagging and votes. It's quite far from being 'free'. You can say anything you want in theory by it won't remain visible for very long.

Pxtl 3y ago

Dang works very hard to censor this site quite heavily and maintain the kind of discourse he and his team want. As is his right. HN is not a example of libertarian social media.

tremon 3y ago
The GP didn't ask for examples of libertarian social media. The GP asked for examples of forums/platforms from a "free society" that had not turned into a cesspool.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

plagiarist 3y ago

Every politicized topic gathers dozens of comments from lunatics who are deliberately ignoring reality. This very week someone on HN told me black people are disproportionately not accepted to colleges because of "genetics." Perhaps HN is on its way.