rhaksw

8 ms·

31.
by rhaksw 3y ago
Bare notice [1] should take zero time to implement. Just show users the true status [2]. Reasons for removal can come later. Right now everyone is still in the dark, and it's a year after acquisition. It is way too easy to shadowban on
32.
Musk says X will address shadowbanning ‘soon,’(techcrunch.com)
3 points by rhaksw 3y ago|5 comments
33.
by rhaksw 3y ago
> Your first three points are blind assertions without supporting justification or basis. You asked me for an alternative and I gave one. You yourself have expressed concern over HN silently re-weighting topics [1]. You don't see tr
34.
by rhaksw 3y ago
> What alternative(s) do you propose? A forum should not do things that elbow out trustful people. That means, don't lie to authors about their actioned content. Forums should show authors the same view that moderators get. If a pos
35.
by rhaksw 3y ago
> even this may be messy by your criteria I think! Only if the recipient sent a false response. If the response were misrepresented then I would object to the technique. But it doesn't sound like that's what happens.
36.
by rhaksw 3y ago
With spam email, the recipient has a chance to recover the mail by looking in their spam folder. No such spam folder is provided to the public on social media.
37.
by rhaksw 3y ago
Okay, so the requests do get rejected, it just uses a delay to make that decision. I don't consider GreetPause to be a form of shadow moderation because the sender knows the commands were rejected. The issue with shadow moderation on p
38.
by rhaksw 3y ago
This subthread started with a discussion about how "HN itself also shadow flags submissions" [1]. That's a slightly different form of moderation than the t.co delays. Another commenter argued "Increasing cost of attacks
39.
by rhaksw 3y ago
In your cost/benefit analysis, you overlook the harms created by secretive actions. That's why I asked for details about your experience. The internet has run on secrets for 40 years. That doesn't make it right. Now that ever
40.
by rhaksw 3y ago
I still see a roughly 2 second delay on first grab. The second is immediate.
41.
by rhaksw 3y ago
> What we do is try to educate them and loop them back in. But that's selective education. You don't do it for every shadow moderated comment. The trend is still that shadow moderation more often disadvantages trustful users. W
42.
by rhaksw 3y ago
You don't see the harm of elbowing out trustful people from the public square?
43.
by rhaksw 3y ago
In your experience where? No research has been done about whether shadow moderation is good or bad for discourse. It was simply adopted by the entire internet because it's perceived as "easier." Indeed, for platforms and adve
44.
by rhaksw 3y ago
> you guys need to first look at the site as it actually is, and not just look at your own pre-existing perceptions. How can one see the site "as it actually is" when the decisions are kept secret from submitters? > People t
45.
by rhaksw 3y ago
> They just post normal links and comments and never run into moderation at all. On the contrary, secret suppression is extremely common. Every social media user has probably been moderated at some point without their knowledge. Look up
46.
by rhaksw 3y ago
> if you submit a story and it doesn't go well, drop a note to the moderators > You can verify that a submission did or didn't go through by checking on the link from an unauthenticated (logged-out) session. Trustful users d
47.
by rhaksw 3y ago
I use the term "shadow moderation".
48.
by rhaksw 3y ago
> how is an explicit ban any less discouraging? It's about whose messages are sidelined, not who gets discouraged. With shadow removals, good-faith users' content is elbowed out without their knowledge. Since they don't kn
49.
by rhaksw 3y ago
Spammers game the system while good-faith users get edged out. Spammers are determined actors who perceive threats everywhere, whereas good-faith users never imagine that a platform would secretly remove their content. Today, you see low qu
50.
by rhaksw 3y ago
So you think secretive measures more often defeat spammers than trusting users? I'd argue HN's content could be a lot better than it currently is. Content curation is necessary, but shadow moderation is not helping. When a forum r
51.
by rhaksw 3y ago
Content moderation systems often hide mod actions from the content author [1]. That's a secret. The opposite would be to show the author of the content some indicator that it's been removed, and I would call that transparent or di
52.
by rhaksw 3y ago
Great point! I just wanted to name the technique. I am actually an active speaker and developer against all secretive content moderation actions.
53.
by rhaksw 3y ago
Spammers are more competent than genuine users. They are advertisers, so they are more likely to be tracking metrics.
54.
by rhaksw 3y ago
Increasing cost of attacks is effective against good faith people, not spammers. Even Cory Doctorow made this case in "Como is Infosec" [1]. The only problem with Cory's argument is, he points people to the SC Principles [2].
55.
by rhaksw 3y ago
You're correct again. Spammers and bots are the most determined actors, so these secretive measures don't impact them. In fact, such secrecy benefits spammers. Good-faith users never imagine that platforms would secretly action
56.
by rhaksw 3y ago
> censorship if you only apply the unwritten and secret "rules" I mostly agree. I argued in an article [1] that it's only censorship if the author of the content is not told about the action taken against the content. Thes
57.
by rhaksw 3y ago
It is a secret if the system does not inform the poster it's been penalized.
58.
by rhaksw 3y ago
That sounds like a play on the "slow ban": > Selective downtime, where the troll finds that the website is down (or really slow) quite often. Not all of the time, because that would tip them off. Trolls are impatient by nature,
59.
by rhaksw 3y ago
The EFF endorses piracy? This is like the internet archive library giving unlimited access to books without authorization for "emergency access" during covid.
60.
by rhaksw 3y ago
That explains how they merged.

More ›