3 ms·
That is fundamentally wrong. Pushing content moderation onto every person who posts a message on social media is a chilling effect on people posting. Pushing co
by mark242 2y ago
That is fundamentally wrong. Pushing content moderation onto every person who posts a message on social media is a chilling effect on people posting. Pushing content moderation onto every person who reads a message on social media is a chilling effect on people reading.
- symlinkk 2y agoPeople are fine reading stuff they disagree with, it’s fun that way. They just downvote if they disagree. It’s not fun sitting around in a moderated hugbox where everyone is saying the same thing
- TRiG_Ireland 2y ago"Stuff I disagree with" is fine. Outright hate is not. There are limits.
- pixl97 2y agoYou're talking about a system of good actors that just disagree on what's being said, if you spend 10 minutes running your own site you'll quickly learn there is a metric shitton of bad actors. Run something unmoderated long enough and, depending where you are, you'll have law enforcement knocking on your door.
- ThrowawayTestr 2y agoDownvotes are a perfect way to ensure you end up with a hugbox where people are afraid to disagree.
- krapp 2y ago>Downvotes are a perfect way to ensure you end up with a hugbox where people are afraid to disagree. Hacker News has downvotes and people here disagree all the time. It's subjective but it even feels like downvoting and disagreement have increased over time, so the presence of downvotes at best doesn't seem to have an effect and at worse seems to encourage disagreement. In fact, I actually can't think of a platform for which your claim is actually true.