site banner
EyesAlight  Formerly blendorgat  2yr ago (text post)   2485 thread views

Do we already have shadowbans?

I noticed that the comment counts don't seem to line up with the total comments on this post, and a couple others. Do we already have shadow bans in place here, or is this just some delay issue?

/images/1662333864401946.webp

3
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Banning them alerts them to the fact that they've been banned, which encourages them to start a new account, which makes our jobs harder.

The thing about dealing with trolls is that you need to do two things:

  • Make sure they're not having fun.

  • Spend as little of your effort as possible in order to spend as much of their effort as possible.

Shadowbanning is great for both of these; there's a point where they say "oh, wait, I've been trolling for two weeks and nobody saw any of it, that was . . . just wasted." And at the same time this means we get considerably more impact for our effort; we ban them half as often, or even a third as often.

I don't plan to use this for anything except trolls, but if someone is straight-up spamming (or, not-hypothetically, mass-downvoting), then I don't really feel bad about it; if they're going to play the game of Annoy The Other Person, then I will play that game too.

LOL. Amateurs.

Imagine trolling without keeping detailed spread sheets of your interact ratios.

Why even bother.

Just go back to being agreeable if you aren't going to put in the effort to be disagreeable

if a job's worth doing, it's worth doing well

The block button exists for a reason. If someone feels user X isn't contributing quality comments, they can block them. Or just downvote them if it's less extreme.

For literal spam sure I get it. But "trolls"? Such a subjective reason to open the door to redditry.

I personally will never put effort into anything in a place where I know I'll be banned at the drop of a hat. Why bother? Especially if, like you said, it may be silently hidden from everyone.

And maybe you only ban low quality dumb troll comments to a reasonable standard. But all it takes is you appointing another janny who's slightly less fair about determining who's a troll. Maybe you appoint a janny team that turns out to all be trans, and they start shadowbanning anyone who questions transdeology.

I just don't understand how groups that have been run off of reddit can still be drawn to strong moderation. I'd take a blockable troll over a power hungry moderator I can't do anything about any day of the week.

I personally will never put effort into anything in a place where I know I'll be banned at the drop of a hat. Why bother? Especially if, like you said, it may be silently hidden from everyone.

It's not as though the moderation here is some great mystery. The mod team has a considerable history, and while they have their critics, I have found their actions to be exceedingly reasonable in the past.

I personally will never put effort into anything in a place where I know I'll be banned at the drop of a hat. Why bother? Especially if, like you said, it may be silently hidden from everyone.

Okay! If you change your mind, you're welcome to give this place another try.

Maybe you appoint a janny team that turns out to all be trans, and they start shadowbanning anyone who questions transdeology.

Then I boot them and find new moderators. Seriously, the userbase has never been shy about complaining about moderators, and I have booted moderators before (okay, moderator.)

I just don't understand how groups that have been run off of reddit can still be drawn to strong moderation.

Because nobody has managed to make a good serious discussion site without strong moderation.

If you think it's possible, I encourage you to prove me wrong and do it. But I'm not convinced it's possible.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats