3 ms·

They're tried for like, a few days now, which proves it can't work!!!

DanBC 13y ago
YouTube promotes the comment: > Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Which seems like a pretty big fail.
- smtddr 13y ago
  you really had to post that here? EDIT: I see the downvotes, but I still believe there are better ways to get the point across without having to create that block of text on HN.
  - itsameta4 13y ago
    He's just encouraging discussion.
  - DanBC 13y ago
    You need to see the word, 85 times, to see just how fucking hard YouTube / Google fail at comments. When you have a single racial slur repeated 85 times even an idiot should know it's not conducive to decent conversation. You don't even need to see the user avatar of a Nazi propaganda cartoon of a Jew to know it's a troll comment.
    - VikingCoder 13y ago
      So, to be clear, you want Google to decide what decent conversation is? Or maybe should the person who posted the video have some control over the discussion, and it should be up to them? Do you want them to remove martinlutherking.org (a horrific troll website) from the results for "MLK" as well?
      - DanBC 13y ago
        Google say they want to decide what decent conversation is. That's why they started banning people from Google services. Those people were using their real names (but Google didn't believe them) or were using long established names (but that wasn't good enough for Google). Google is making many changes in order to "improve comment quality" on YouTube. And yet they still fail, really hard. > Or maybe should the person who posted the video have some control over the discussion, and it should be up to them? I guess that's easier to say when you're not getting dozens of hateful messages trolling your channel every day. But, really, if that's what Google wants (channel owners to control the channels) that's fine. Just stop banning people for using something that Google doesn't think is a real name, stop tying G+ into everything, give channel owners better tools. > Do you want them to remove martinlutherking.org (a horrific troll website) from the results for "MLK" as well? This discussion is only about YouTube comments. Why are you dragging in other irrelevant hypotheticals? Me asking you "So, you don't care if someone spraypaints 'pakis out' on someone's shop?" would be just as daft.
    - moocowduckquack 13y ago
      "When you have a single racial slur repeated 85 times even an idiot should know it's not conducive to decent conversation." cough...
- Houshalter 13y ago
  They said that were promoting this because it was controversial. One, of course that policy is going to result in controversial comments, that's the point. Two, that means a significant fraction of YouTube's user base liked that comment. You can tweak the comment system all you want but you can't fix the users themselves. The best that can be done is personalized filtering. Some kind of system that automatically knows you don't like comments like that and tries to give you better comments instead. I believe they tried something like that but it doesn't seem to work very well (and it might be too computationally expensive to begin with.)
Groxx 13y ago
Well, and Facebook Comments all over for a while now. Those are frequently as bad as Youtube comments, and (at least in my experience) Facebook is more real-name aggro than G+.

DanBC 13y ago

YouTube promotes the comment: > Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Nigger Which seems like a pretty big fail.

smtddr 13y ago
you really had to post that here? EDIT: I see the downvotes, but I still believe there are better ways to get the point across without having to create that block of text on HN.
- itsameta4 13y ago
  He's just encouraging discussion.
- DanBC 13y ago
  You need to see the word, 85 times, to see just how fucking hard YouTube / Google fail at comments. When you have a single racial slur repeated 85 times even an idiot should know it's not conducive to decent conversation. You don't even need to see the user avatar of a Nazi propaganda cartoon of a Jew to know it's a troll comment.
  - VikingCoder 13y ago
    So, to be clear, you want Google to decide what decent conversation is? Or maybe should the person who posted the video have some control over the discussion, and it should be up to them? Do you want them to remove martinlutherking.org (a horrific troll website) from the results for "MLK" as well?
    - DanBC 13y ago
      Google say they want to decide what decent conversation is. That's why they started banning people from Google services. Those people were using their real names (but Google didn't believe them) or were using long established names (but that wasn't good enough for Google). Google is making many changes in order to "improve comment quality" on YouTube. And yet they still fail, really hard. > Or maybe should the person who posted the video have some control over the discussion, and it should be up to them? I guess that's easier to say when you're not getting dozens of hateful messages trolling your channel every day. But, really, if that's what Google wants (channel owners to control the channels) that's fine. Just stop banning people for using something that Google doesn't think is a real name, stop tying G+ into everything, give channel owners better tools. > Do you want them to remove martinlutherking.org (a horrific troll website) from the results for "MLK" as well? This discussion is only about YouTube comments. Why are you dragging in other irrelevant hypotheticals? Me asking you "So, you don't care if someone spraypaints 'pakis out' on someone's shop?" would be just as daft.
  - moocowduckquack 13y ago
    "When you have a single racial slur repeated 85 times even an idiot should know it's not conducive to decent conversation." cough...
Houshalter 13y ago
They said that were promoting this because it was controversial. One, of course that policy is going to result in controversial comments, that's the point. Two, that means a significant fraction of YouTube's user base liked that comment. You can tweak the comment system all you want but you can't fix the users themselves. The best that can be done is personalized filtering. Some kind of system that automatically knows you don't like comments like that and tries to give you better comments instead. I believe they tried something like that but it doesn't seem to work very well (and it might be too computationally expensive to begin with.)

Groxx 13y ago

Well, and Facebook Comments all over for a while now. Those are frequently as bad as Youtube comments, and (at least in my experience) Facebook is more real-name aggro than G+.