bluesky's singal problem
December 13, 2024 12:43 PM Subscribe
"Now with 25 million users, Bluesky is facing a test that will determine whether or not its platform will still be seen as a safe space and place of refuge from the toxicity of X. In recent days, a large number of users on Bluesky have been urging the company to ban one newcomer for his opinions and works shared both on and off the platform. Writer and podcast host Jesse Singal joined Bluesky 12 days ago to the horror of much of the Bluesky community. [...] He is now the most blocked user on the social network, and user outrage over his participation on the platform is growing." ('Bluesky at a crossroads as users petition to ban Jesse Singal over anti-trans views, harassment,' TechCrunch)
Can't you just send him death threats? I think that's an important part of any large online community.
posted by jy4m at 12:46 PM on December 13 [29 favorites]
posted by jy4m at 12:46 PM on December 13 [29 favorites]
This sounds very 2020.
posted by kickingtheground at 12:53 PM on December 13 [1 favorite]
posted by kickingtheground at 12:53 PM on December 13 [1 favorite]
Even with Dorsey out of the picture, Bluesky seems to be speedrunning a lot of the worst bits of Twitter even before Skum X-ified it.
Gonna keep hanging out on the little Mastodon instance where I'm a mod, I think. I've considered picking Bluesky up, but if this is how they're gonna play it I'll pass.
posted by humbug at 12:54 PM on December 13 [13 favorites]
Gonna keep hanging out on the little Mastodon instance where I'm a mod, I think. I've considered picking Bluesky up, but if this is how they're gonna play it I'll pass.
posted by humbug at 12:54 PM on December 13 [13 favorites]
I thought the point of BlueSky was that it’s supposed to be easier for everybody to effectively block Jesse Singal, not that it’s supposed to be more heavily moderated top-down? But I don’t really understand BlueSky, clearly.
posted by atoxyl at 12:59 PM on December 13 [17 favorites]
posted by atoxyl at 12:59 PM on December 13 [17 favorites]
Honestly there ought to be some standard about banning people who have a history of Libs of Tik-Tok style harassment. I understand that people with experience in moderating would need to write it and it might not capture every instance because capturing every instance would require overreach, but frankly if BlueSky turns into a new venue for organizing your froth-at-mouth bigots and pointing them at individuals, schools, etc, I'm going to Mastodon even though that sounds complicated and I've just started to get my BlueSky like I like it.
It is so characteristic of these lying trash heaps that the minute they actually get their own little Nazi platform where they can hate trans people as much as they want, they immediately group up to go and smash people elsewhere. Worth remembering that you cannot compromise with these people, because they do not want a place of their own to do their thing, they specifically want to go other places and ruin them for other people.
posted by Frowner at 1:16 PM on December 13 [63 favorites]
It is so characteristic of these lying trash heaps that the minute they actually get their own little Nazi platform where they can hate trans people as much as they want, they immediately group up to go and smash people elsewhere. Worth remembering that you cannot compromise with these people, because they do not want a place of their own to do their thing, they specifically want to go other places and ruin them for other people.
posted by Frowner at 1:16 PM on December 13 [63 favorites]
I mean, I personally feel like blocking Singal and co is a no-brainer. Blue Sky's content was built on the backs of trans folks and other neat weirdos, so again, seems like a no-brainer to me!
posted by Kitteh at 1:19 PM on December 13 [11 favorites]
posted by Kitteh at 1:19 PM on December 13 [11 favorites]
> I thought the point of BlueSky was that it’s supposed to be easier for everybody to effectively block Jesse Singal
Singal is reportedly the most-blocked user on Bluesky, so yes. My impression is that his presence and the drama around him have brought over hundreds of sympathetic agitators (who organize on separate forum sites), and that the shared blocklist system isn't scaling and updating fast enough for the community to handle this separate from Bluesky admins.
posted by mvd at 1:21 PM on December 13 [16 favorites]
Singal is reportedly the most-blocked user on Bluesky, so yes. My impression is that his presence and the drama around him have brought over hundreds of sympathetic agitators (who organize on separate forum sites), and that the shared blocklist system isn't scaling and updating fast enough for the community to handle this separate from Bluesky admins.
posted by mvd at 1:21 PM on December 13 [16 favorites]
I've seen multiple people claiming that Singal will sue if he's banned, but that seems preposterous to me. Can't any service just ban anyone for any reason they wish? It's not a federally run government agency, ffs.
posted by dobbs at 1:22 PM on December 13 [3 favorites]
posted by dobbs at 1:22 PM on December 13 [3 favorites]
Obligatory link to Mike Masnick’s Speedrunning the Content Moderation Learning Curve post. We’ve seen this story before…
posted by graphweaver at 1:25 PM on December 13 [10 favorites]
posted by graphweaver at 1:25 PM on December 13 [10 favorites]
Bluesky finally made a statement, and
Bluesky is cooked. Now what?
posted by Pope Guilty at 1:28 PM on December 13 [25 favorites]
We do not currently take action on accounts that share Bluesky screenshots with commentary, unless that commentary violates our Guidelines. We will take action when someone's private information is shared without their consent, but only when it is personally identifiable and verifiable in-app.In the specific case, this is about Singal block-evading and posting screenshots of Bluesky posts by people like Alejandra Carabello on his Twitter account in order to paint a target on her for harassment. In the general case, this is straightforwardly laying out that the Libs of Tiktok model of stochastic harassment ("I didn't tell anybody to do anything! I just post screenshots and videos, with commentary!") is acceptable and exempt from moderation.
Bluesky is cooked. Now what?
posted by Pope Guilty at 1:28 PM on December 13 [25 favorites]
Singal posted about how he was getting tech support help from "a kiwi farmer" and I really just want to sit him down and ask why he thinks a forum dedicated to harassing people to suicide considers him someone worth helping out.
posted by 0xFCAF at 1:29 PM on December 13 [29 favorites]
posted by 0xFCAF at 1:29 PM on December 13 [29 favorites]
I want Singal to remain on Bluesky, because Bluesky (using tools like Blockenheimer) makes it so easy to block not just him, but the people who follow/like/repost him. He’s a honeypot for human excrement.
posted by ArmandoAkimbo at 1:38 PM on December 13 [5 favorites]
posted by ArmandoAkimbo at 1:38 PM on December 13 [5 favorites]
Bluesky is cooked. Now what?
Now we fast forward to 3 years in the future where Metafilter has 3 SLBS posts per week and the occasional sideswipe on Metatalk at people who "complain" because they "don't like" Bluesky.
posted by polytope subirb enby-of-piano-dice at 1:38 PM on December 13 [9 favorites]
Now we fast forward to 3 years in the future where Metafilter has 3 SLBS posts per week and the occasional sideswipe on Metatalk at people who "complain" because they "don't like" Bluesky.
posted by polytope subirb enby-of-piano-dice at 1:38 PM on December 13 [9 favorites]
Oh that's what's going on, I've just seen cryptic comments on fedi about bluesky speedrunning the moderation curve.
Ultimately I think this is a problem that may be impossible to deal with once you grow to a certain size. As an admin of a Mastodon installation that I deliberately keep small, I can just block the fuck out of places that are happy to let this sort of shit get posted. But when you're a major social site whose userbase is measured in millions, and wants to grow to be even larger, a whole lot of moral choices start getting overshadowed by what will get you enough money to keep the servers running.
posted by egypturnash at 1:42 PM on December 13 [9 favorites]
Ultimately I think this is a problem that may be impossible to deal with once you grow to a certain size. As an admin of a Mastodon installation that I deliberately keep small, I can just block the fuck out of places that are happy to let this sort of shit get posted. But when you're a major social site whose userbase is measured in millions, and wants to grow to be even larger, a whole lot of moral choices start getting overshadowed by what will get you enough money to keep the servers running.
posted by egypturnash at 1:42 PM on December 13 [9 favorites]
Hey, remember when everyone was all "so what if people who you blocked can still see your posts, what's the big deeeeealllll, that's open protocol lyfe baybee"
posted by grumpybear69 at 1:43 PM on December 13 [5 favorites]
posted by grumpybear69 at 1:43 PM on December 13 [5 favorites]
Singal posted about how he was getting tech support help from "a kiwi farmer" and I really just want to sit him down and ask why he thinks a forum dedicated to harassing people to suicide considers him someone worth helping out.
I'm out of the loop---what does this mean?
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 1:45 PM on December 13 [2 favorites]
I'm out of the loop---what does this mean?
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 1:45 PM on December 13 [2 favorites]
Essentially, the AT protocol is not safe, because it offers no protection from harassment. So, yeah, BlueSky is cooked.
posted by grumpybear69 at 1:49 PM on December 13 [2 favorites]
posted by grumpybear69 at 1:49 PM on December 13 [2 favorites]
Pope Guilty: “Bluesky is cooked. Now what?”Goddammit. I liked it better than Masto because more of the old gang was there. Masto is fine as an app, but it's even less moderated. People wound up on Bluesky because Masto didn't feel safe.
posted by ob1quixote at 2:00 PM on December 13 [4 favorites]
Humans seem to have a fundamental problem in understanding that in order for a group of humans to behave with some baseline level of kindness to each other, there must be some form of policing to get rid of the humans who are not interested in participating in kindness. There will always be assholes, thus there always must be cops. A platform with no cops is not a safe space. Full stop.
posted by seanmpuckett at 2:01 PM on December 13 [14 favorites]
posted by seanmpuckett at 2:01 PM on December 13 [14 favorites]
The SA forums of all places actually had a decent policy for rules-lawyering trolls who would get right up to the edge of a written rule without stepping over it: A catchall infraction for trying to circumvent the rules, which could result in suspensions or bans, on the principle that these sorts of users were even more trouble than blatant violators.
I don't think Bluesky is interested in that kind of moderation, but the alternative is letting asshole behavior fester on your platform.
posted by figurant at 2:03 PM on December 13 [11 favorites]
I don't think Bluesky is interested in that kind of moderation, but the alternative is letting asshole behavior fester on your platform.
posted by figurant at 2:03 PM on December 13 [11 favorites]
It's pretty grim that Lotax could very well go down in history as the best owner of a large online community.
The benefit(?) of struggling to commodify a community, rather than trying to trick people into thinking a commodity is a community.
posted by Reyturner at 2:05 PM on December 13 [2 favorites]
The benefit(?) of struggling to commodify a community, rather than trying to trick people into thinking a commodity is a community.
posted by Reyturner at 2:05 PM on December 13 [2 favorites]
I've been on Bluesky a couple weeks, and enjoy it. Enjoy not going to that other septic pit.
posted by Goofyy at 2:07 PM on December 13 [5 favorites]
posted by Goofyy at 2:07 PM on December 13 [5 favorites]
This is my shocked face!
posted by 922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a at 2:11 PM on December 13 [1 favorite]
posted by 922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a at 2:11 PM on December 13 [1 favorite]
It just fuckin sucks that trans people helped turn Bluesky into a popular and fun platform and now are being completely thrown under the bus and, like, where are we supposed to go to find each other and build community if everywhere that trans people gather gets invaded by transphobes and no one with power does anything about it? Every trans person I know is struggling at the moment and we can't even have a public place to talk about that without notorious transphobes showing up and getting better treatment than we do.
posted by an octopus IRL at 2:12 PM on December 13 [37 favorites]
posted by an octopus IRL at 2:12 PM on December 13 [37 favorites]
So, yeah, BlueSky is cooked.
Got on, had a few weeks of looking around, then noped out. I don’t know if I’ve changed or it’s other cultural factors (feels like the latter), but the signal to noise now seems so bad that after years of heavy use, social media strikes me as really being just about practically, usefully over.
posted by ryanshepard at 2:12 PM on December 13 [6 favorites]
Got on, had a few weeks of looking around, then noped out. I don’t know if I’ve changed or it’s other cultural factors (feels like the latter), but the signal to noise now seems so bad that after years of heavy use, social media strikes me as really being just about practically, usefully over.
posted by ryanshepard at 2:12 PM on December 13 [6 favorites]
I think that we in general - and I absolutely include myself - are really not prepared for how sideways things could go. Singhal is a bad guy - I think people don't really internalize that inciting stochastic terrorism is as bad as it is, and we still think of these people as on some level just pervert trolls. We're headed into what look like they are going to be extremely bad, violent years, and this guy is someone who is literally constantly doing things that he knows can drive people to suicide or get them murdered, and he does it on purpose, because he knows he can get away with it. He is a bad, violent person. Giving him a platform of any kind is bad. He should be deplatformed, not because his "ideas" are motivated, ugly lies but because he has this whole "who me" way to incite violence against private citizens because of their gender and sexuality.
There are lots of people who have bad, ugly views and we put up with them because formally cracking down on them involves so much policing and overreach that it causes more problems than it solves. But giving platforms to people who have a violent audience that can be steered to attack people is really, really dangerous and if people were smarter they'd be erring on the side of caution. Of course, BlueSky is probably afraid of Singhal themselves, for fairly good reason, but the trouble is that someone has to stand up to these people or they just threaten until they have absolute power.
I am really concerned that we're going to look back in a few years and see this as the direct precursor to organized violence at scale. People are really still acting like it can't happen here - like the present situation is as bad as it gets.
posted by Frowner at 2:16 PM on December 13 [36 favorites]
There are lots of people who have bad, ugly views and we put up with them because formally cracking down on them involves so much policing and overreach that it causes more problems than it solves. But giving platforms to people who have a violent audience that can be steered to attack people is really, really dangerous and if people were smarter they'd be erring on the side of caution. Of course, BlueSky is probably afraid of Singhal themselves, for fairly good reason, but the trouble is that someone has to stand up to these people or they just threaten until they have absolute power.
I am really concerned that we're going to look back in a few years and see this as the direct precursor to organized violence at scale. People are really still acting like it can't happen here - like the present situation is as bad as it gets.
posted by Frowner at 2:16 PM on December 13 [36 favorites]
Im pretty sure that among 25 million users, someone is going to be an icorrigible a**hole. If Bsky makes it easy to block them, that's about all you can do. There exist, on the internet, people who will go to any length to be the leading a**hole in any field, because it gives them attention. they might actually dislike some characteristic of a person or group, but what they really crave is a megaphone.
We've got Rule 34: If it exists, there is porn of it.
Maybe we need a Rule 35: if it exists, someone will proclaim loudly to hate it.
posted by JustSayNoDawg at 2:21 PM on December 13 [3 favorites]
We've got Rule 34: If it exists, there is porn of it.
Maybe we need a Rule 35: if it exists, someone will proclaim loudly to hate it.
posted by JustSayNoDawg at 2:21 PM on December 13 [3 favorites]
How does the sentiment that you can't ban people for being an asshole have currency on Metafilter, a site built in part on strong moderation?
posted by Pope Guilty at 2:24 PM on December 13 [20 favorites]
posted by Pope Guilty at 2:24 PM on December 13 [20 favorites]
If Bsky makes it easy to block them, that's about all you can do.
I mean, you can also ban them. Ask me how.
posted by cortex at 2:24 PM on December 13 [63 favorites]
I mean, you can also ban them. Ask me how.
posted by cortex at 2:24 PM on December 13 [63 favorites]
Yeah. Bluesky is just a forum with fancy tech and a bunch of venture capital. They can just ban him. I'd be curious to see what their internal discussion about has been like, and why they don't want to just ban him (they banned libs of tiktok pretty quickly, but she was definitely violating terms of service). I think maybe they worry he can throw a fit?
posted by dis_integration at 2:41 PM on December 13
posted by dis_integration at 2:41 PM on December 13
Im pretty sure that among 25 million users, someone is going to be an icorrigible a**hole. If Bsky makes it easy to block them, that's about all you can do.
That is incorrect! On Twitter, you can set your profile to private, which prevents anyone that you don't want from seeing your tweets. And, unlike BlueSky, there is no firehose of data where everything is published regardless of who is blocked. With BlueSky, you can't set your profile to private and there are no intentions to make that an option. So no, there definitely is stuff you can do, but BlueSky refuses to do it, because of a boneheaded devotion to "openness" which is looking more and more like libertarianism.
posted by grumpybear69 at 2:52 PM on December 13 [15 favorites]
That is incorrect! On Twitter, you can set your profile to private, which prevents anyone that you don't want from seeing your tweets. And, unlike BlueSky, there is no firehose of data where everything is published regardless of who is blocked. With BlueSky, you can't set your profile to private and there are no intentions to make that an option. So no, there definitely is stuff you can do, but BlueSky refuses to do it, because of a boneheaded devotion to "openness" which is looking more and more like libertarianism.
posted by grumpybear69 at 2:52 PM on December 13 [15 favorites]
I'm also a fedi user who kind of looks over at bluesky as "Oh yeah, all those people who joined fedi a few years ago but wanted An Audience instead of a conversation seem to be jumping ship to go there." I like fedi because as "social media", it is actually social, meaning my circle of friends, and theirs, and I can block That Guy My Friend Excuses who I just know will Say That Thing Again some time.
Instead, it seems everybody's trying to re-build post-fairness-doctrine AM Talk Radio. We did that. We saw where it went. It's not going to work.
I get that All Your Journalist Colleagues are On That Platform and all, but just get over the eye-rolling about how technical fedi users are. Find a conversation with people you like, instead of complaining that The One Channel Never Has Anything Good On. You may as well whine that the conversations in your kitchen suck.
posted by rum-soaked space hobo at 3:16 PM on December 13 [16 favorites]
Instead, it seems everybody's trying to re-build post-fairness-doctrine AM Talk Radio. We did that. We saw where it went. It's not going to work.
I get that All Your Journalist Colleagues are On That Platform and all, but just get over the eye-rolling about how technical fedi users are. Find a conversation with people you like, instead of complaining that The One Channel Never Has Anything Good On. You may as well whine that the conversations in your kitchen suck.
posted by rum-soaked space hobo at 3:16 PM on December 13 [16 favorites]
(Also I should point out that I have a small masto instance run by friends with a shared moderation philosophy: I appreciate that people who misunderstand and think of Mastodon as "an app" and just set themselves up on mastodon.social end up with a terrible That One Channel experience.)
posted by rum-soaked space hobo at 3:19 PM on December 13 [2 favorites]
posted by rum-soaked space hobo at 3:19 PM on December 13 [2 favorites]
I’m with egypturnash and rum-soaked space hobo: this is what happens if an instance gets too big. We also run an instance, and we keep it limited to people we know in real life. At that scale it moderates itself.
Yeah, mastodon certainly isn’t an app, or I should say plenty of people have written apps for it. If you’re using the mobile client by the mastodon.social folks, you're missing out. I’m partial to Toot!, it’s full of whimsy.
posted by antinomia at 3:46 PM on December 13 [4 favorites]
Yeah, mastodon certainly isn’t an app, or I should say plenty of people have written apps for it. If you’re using the mobile client by the mastodon.social folks, you're missing out. I’m partial to Toot!, it’s full of whimsy.
posted by antinomia at 3:46 PM on December 13 [4 favorites]
Yeah, anyone who associates with the fruit-growing people deserves no benefit of the doubt about their malice and bad faith.
posted by praemunire at 4:12 PM on December 13 [1 favorite]
posted by praemunire at 4:12 PM on December 13 [1 favorite]
but the signal to noise now seems so bad
Use the "following" feed, and only see stuff from people you follow. You can change your settings to turn off reposts and/or quote posts and/or replies if it's still too noisy. Or use the "Quiet Posters" feed to see only the people you follow who don't post a lot. Or just look at the "Gardening Feed" and see nice pictures of plants.
It's extremely easy to weed out the noise if you don't follow noisy people.
posted by oneirodynia at 4:14 PM on December 13 [10 favorites]
Use the "following" feed, and only see stuff from people you follow. You can change your settings to turn off reposts and/or quote posts and/or replies if it's still too noisy. Or use the "Quiet Posters" feed to see only the people you follow who don't post a lot. Or just look at the "Gardening Feed" and see nice pictures of plants.
It's extremely easy to weed out the noise if you don't follow noisy people.
posted by oneirodynia at 4:14 PM on December 13 [10 favorites]
I made kind of a dumb mistake: I thought I had my little social media all sorted out. I'm really passive about social media, I hardly post anything anywhere ever, except here. I've got my little comics and techy stuff at Reddit, I've got my historians and economists at Twitter, but Bluesky had opened up a new front in the passive-enjoyment world; it was funny, it was a little outre in the way trans and queer humor often is, it could be scathing but it wasn't really angry, not at the sitegeist level.
When the latest mass migration happened, the whole tenor of the place changed. A lot more angry people came on, and made the place feel angry. It was unsettling, in a mild sense of the word. The anger that had made sense over on Twitter, didn't make any sense on Bluesky.
And I know it's all down to who you follow and what tools you use--I've said before that my experience of Twitter seems entirely different than other people's, in a much more positive way. But my impression of Bluesky seemed to match a lot of people's.
It's one thing for a place to change its temperature, to become angrier. But the Singal thing really is different, because of his weaponization of...well, his own victimization. He plays for two audiences: First, whoever might pick up a magazine or go to a site where they might see his journalism, but then there's the people who pay for the privilege of hearing how much trouble he gets in for writing for the first audience. It's that growling second audience that is the trouble. And now Bluesky has decided it can sacrifice the people who made the site interesting, in favor of all the engagement that second audience will bring.
It's hard to describe the kind of disappointment where you thought you were in kind of a nice place--imperfect, but nice--and then it suddenly, really suddenly goes bad on you.
posted by mittens at 4:17 PM on December 13 [11 favorites]
When the latest mass migration happened, the whole tenor of the place changed. A lot more angry people came on, and made the place feel angry. It was unsettling, in a mild sense of the word. The anger that had made sense over on Twitter, didn't make any sense on Bluesky.
And I know it's all down to who you follow and what tools you use--I've said before that my experience of Twitter seems entirely different than other people's, in a much more positive way. But my impression of Bluesky seemed to match a lot of people's.
It's one thing for a place to change its temperature, to become angrier. But the Singal thing really is different, because of his weaponization of...well, his own victimization. He plays for two audiences: First, whoever might pick up a magazine or go to a site where they might see his journalism, but then there's the people who pay for the privilege of hearing how much trouble he gets in for writing for the first audience. It's that growling second audience that is the trouble. And now Bluesky has decided it can sacrifice the people who made the site interesting, in favor of all the engagement that second audience will bring.
It's hard to describe the kind of disappointment where you thought you were in kind of a nice place--imperfect, but nice--and then it suddenly, really suddenly goes bad on you.
posted by mittens at 4:17 PM on December 13 [11 favorites]
I'm also a fedi user who kind of looks over at bluesky as "Oh yeah, all those people who joined fedi a few years ago but wanted An Audience instead of a conversation seem to be jumping ship to go there." I like fedi because as "social media", it is actually social, meaning my circle of friends, and theirs, and I can block That Guy My Friend Excuses who I just know will Say That Thing Again some time.
This is really obnoxiously smug. I want to talk to people I don't already know and I want to talk to people who are never going to touch the fediverse with a ten-foot pole. On both Twitter and Bluesky I've got to meet people I wouldn't have otherwise, and sneering at them for being clout chasers because they're not using your bespoke implementation of Mastodon is gross and self-satisfied and offputting.
posted by Pope Guilty at 4:28 PM on December 13 [38 favorites]
This is really obnoxiously smug. I want to talk to people I don't already know and I want to talk to people who are never going to touch the fediverse with a ten-foot pole. On both Twitter and Bluesky I've got to meet people I wouldn't have otherwise, and sneering at them for being clout chasers because they're not using your bespoke implementation of Mastodon is gross and self-satisfied and offputting.
posted by Pope Guilty at 4:28 PM on December 13 [38 favorites]
> dis_integration: [emph added] "Bluesky is just a forum with fancy tech and a bunch of venture capital. They can just ban him."
I suspect the "venture capital" part is a non-trivial factor of why they won't ban him even though they could. Specifically, the sorts of people who gain VC funding like this (as well as the VCs themselves) often only think in terms of maximizing growth and size (e.g.: "you know what's cool? [...] a billion dollars"). Anything that limits growth -- e.g.: banning shit-heels like Singal -- is anathema. And if there's anything that Libs-of-TikTok-esque stochastic terrorists have shown is that there is a sufficiently large and hungry audience for that kind of thing. Plus, they have the bonus of stirring up "engagement" (read: hate-storms) on their platform which surely makes their numbers look better.
Of course, we've also learned over the years there's also a non-trivial portion of Silicon Valley power players who are conservative assholes themselves, so even if the growth imperative weren't the underlying motivation in this case, an anti-trans impulse would/could be.
posted by mhum at 4:32 PM on December 13 [3 favorites]
I suspect the "venture capital" part is a non-trivial factor of why they won't ban him even though they could. Specifically, the sorts of people who gain VC funding like this (as well as the VCs themselves) often only think in terms of maximizing growth and size (e.g.: "you know what's cool? [...] a billion dollars"). Anything that limits growth -- e.g.: banning shit-heels like Singal -- is anathema. And if there's anything that Libs-of-TikTok-esque stochastic terrorists have shown is that there is a sufficiently large and hungry audience for that kind of thing. Plus, they have the bonus of stirring up "engagement" (read: hate-storms) on their platform which surely makes their numbers look better.
Of course, we've also learned over the years there's also a non-trivial portion of Silicon Valley power players who are conservative assholes themselves, so even if the growth imperative weren't the underlying motivation in this case, an anti-trans impulse would/could be.
posted by mhum at 4:32 PM on December 13 [3 favorites]
Humans seem to have a fundamental problem in understanding that in order for a group of humans to behave with some baseline level of kindness to each other, there must be some form of policing to get rid of the humans who are not interested in participating in kindness.
It's less a problem in understanding and more that we have had people arguing for decades that tolerance is a moral precept obliging us to extend a hand to abusers and the hateful, instead of what it is - a peace treaty only extended to those who will abide by it.
posted by NoxAeternum at 4:38 PM on December 13 [7 favorites]
It's less a problem in understanding and more that we have had people arguing for decades that tolerance is a moral precept obliging us to extend a hand to abusers and the hateful, instead of what it is - a peace treaty only extended to those who will abide by it.
posted by NoxAeternum at 4:38 PM on December 13 [7 favorites]
Pope Guilty, it sounds like you want to talk about the users of these platforms instead of the platforms themselves? If so, count me out.
posted by rum-soaked space hobo at 4:57 PM on December 13 [2 favorites]
posted by rum-soaked space hobo at 4:57 PM on December 13 [2 favorites]
Essentially, the AT protocol is not safe, because it offers no protection from harassment.
Pretty sure no protocol is safe, just as no car is safe if there's a lunatic driving it.
As I understand it, there are two separate issues. What Singal does, he can still do if he's kicked off. Post are public, just as they are here on Metafilter. You can screenshot anything here and make fun of it somewhere else.
The second issue is whether to kick him off. It seems to me that any social media system ought to have some "due process" for doing so. The question is then if he hasn't broken the rules of the system he's on, can he be kicked off simply for being evil.
posted by CheeseDigestsAll at 5:10 PM on December 13 [1 favorite]
Pretty sure no protocol is safe, just as no car is safe if there's a lunatic driving it.
As I understand it, there are two separate issues. What Singal does, he can still do if he's kicked off. Post are public, just as they are here on Metafilter. You can screenshot anything here and make fun of it somewhere else.
The second issue is whether to kick him off. It seems to me that any social media system ought to have some "due process" for doing so. The question is then if he hasn't broken the rules of the system he's on, can he be kicked off simply for being evil.
posted by CheeseDigestsAll at 5:10 PM on December 13 [1 favorite]
Pope Guilty, it sounds like you want to talk about the users of these platforms instead of the platforms themselves? If so, count me out.
You opened by describing the people using a platform you see as beneath you in a really insulting way so I don't know where this is coming from.
posted by Pope Guilty at 5:34 PM on December 13 [20 favorites]
You opened by describing the people using a platform you see as beneath you in a really insulting way so I don't know where this is coming from.
posted by Pope Guilty at 5:34 PM on December 13 [20 favorites]
What? I described an experience that people had when they bounced off of the fediverse, and advised adjusting goals (in the early waves of migration off twitter, there was a lot of conversation about "follower count" that showed a real need for reframing). I also said to get over the eye-rolling superiority complex that goes "See those people over there? They think they're better than us! That's how you know we're better than them!" You then stepped in and acted exactly this out.
I listed my specific setup as full disclosure of why I have a better experience than most, not some sort of scolding.
I wanted to talk about the systems of meeting people you don't already know as friends-of-friends, instead of having Jessie Singal thrust into a feed by strange top-down algorithms, but it seems you want the topic to be "rum-soaked space hobo talked about fediverse, therefore he is Smug!"
posted by rum-soaked space hobo at 5:49 PM on December 13 [1 favorite]
I listed my specific setup as full disclosure of why I have a better experience than most, not some sort of scolding.
I wanted to talk about the systems of meeting people you don't already know as friends-of-friends, instead of having Jessie Singal thrust into a feed by strange top-down algorithms, but it seems you want the topic to be "rum-soaked space hobo talked about fediverse, therefore he is Smug!"
posted by rum-soaked space hobo at 5:49 PM on December 13 [1 favorite]
Going on a social media site and complaining about the signal to noise ratio is hilarious.
posted by srboisvert at 6:08 PM on December 13 [5 favorites]
posted by srboisvert at 6:08 PM on December 13 [5 favorites]
Mod note: Hey there rum-soaked space hobo, please take a break from the back and forth comparing platforms and let the Bluesky users have this conversation about the platform, which this post is about.
You're welcome to create a post about Mastodon and why people enjoy using it, but please avoid coming into this thread and being dismissive about Bluesky users, thank you.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 6:09 PM on December 13 [6 favorites]
You're welcome to create a post about Mastodon and why people enjoy using it, but please avoid coming into this thread and being dismissive about Bluesky users, thank you.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 6:09 PM on December 13 [6 favorites]
On his latest podcast, Singal apparently named individual Bluesky users who'd posted things that offended him. Some of those users have him blocked, which means he went out of his way to find their posts and usernames to quote to his listeners.
Transcript excerpts here (click past the "graphic media" label, it's not graphic, just textual screenshots)
That seems like a clear attempt to incite harassment against individual Bluesky users. Watching for the T&S team's next move.
posted by Pallas Athena at 6:47 PM on December 13 [7 favorites]
Transcript excerpts here (click past the "graphic media" label, it's not graphic, just textual screenshots)
That seems like a clear attempt to incite harassment against individual Bluesky users. Watching for the T&S team's next move.
posted by Pallas Athena at 6:47 PM on December 13 [7 favorites]
What Singal does, he can still do if he's kicked off. Post are public, just as they are here on Metafilter. You can screenshot anything here and make fun of it somewhere else.
Yes, that is precisely the problem. It is also a problem with Metafilter, but nobody gives a shit about Metafilter, so the actual incidence of screenshot harassment is low. And Metafilter at least allows you to hide your identity.
A protocol that does not allow for real privacy is not a protocol that should be used for social media.
posted by grumpybear69 at 6:53 PM on December 13 [3 favorites]
Yes, that is precisely the problem. It is also a problem with Metafilter, but nobody gives a shit about Metafilter, so the actual incidence of screenshot harassment is low. And Metafilter at least allows you to hide your identity.
A protocol that does not allow for real privacy is not a protocol that should be used for social media.
posted by grumpybear69 at 6:53 PM on December 13 [3 favorites]
As one of the trans Bluesky users in the spotlight here, I really can't stress enough the danger and harm Singal has caused and is causing. I mean, for shit's sake he's shined a spotlight on actual, real life friends of mine, and let his flying monkeys have at it. People in my cluster, people I've formed relationships with online and offline alike, are saying fuck it and leaving, or at the very least dialing everything back because it no longer feels safe to post the way we did even two or three months ago. Bluesky has gone from being the most fun I've had on social media since LiveJournal into a space that feels dangerous and hostile. My trans siblings and I have enough shit going on in the real world that losing one of the few places we had where we could socialize and be ourselves is not helping matters at all.
Bluesky is becoming the new Nazi bar, and now the original patrons are leaving.
posted by SansPoint at 6:54 PM on December 13 [45 favorites]
Bluesky is becoming the new Nazi bar, and now the original patrons are leaving.
posted by SansPoint at 6:54 PM on December 13 [45 favorites]
I'm so sorry, SansPoint.
posted by fingers_of_fire at 6:58 PM on December 13 [1 favorite]
posted by fingers_of_fire at 6:58 PM on December 13 [1 favorite]
It’s ridiculous that they don’t just kick him. It’s not a death sentence for someone if they get kicked for being an asshole. But it is a death sentence if you allow assholes to harass people until they want to die.
Being an asshole has to have an associated cost.
Learn from Karl Popper.
This is a branding moment and they are failing.
-v-
posted by varion at 7:02 PM on December 13 [3 favorites]
Being an asshole has to have an associated cost.
Learn from Karl Popper.
This is a branding moment and they are failing.
-v-
posted by varion at 7:02 PM on December 13 [3 favorites]
I mean, you can also ban them. Ask me how.
Going into detail would reveal things best left in the past (even sharing this much might be risky), but someone here applied a mild bit of scarlet-lettering offsite about me from a post of mine and subjected me to an ultimately brief and mild spate of harassment, is totally still around here, and at least one mod knows about it. That it was very brief and very mild is irrelevant, though. I'm pretty sure their action at the time was basically a disposable moment of outrage and I have reason to believe they don't even remember it. The axe forgets, but the tree remembers. And this place is not immune to letting someone who's tried to bring outside opprobrium on someone else here stick around.
posted by tclark at 7:02 PM on December 13 [4 favorites]
Going into detail would reveal things best left in the past (even sharing this much might be risky), but someone here applied a mild bit of scarlet-lettering offsite about me from a post of mine and subjected me to an ultimately brief and mild spate of harassment, is totally still around here, and at least one mod knows about it. That it was very brief and very mild is irrelevant, though. I'm pretty sure their action at the time was basically a disposable moment of outrage and I have reason to believe they don't even remember it. The axe forgets, but the tree remembers. And this place is not immune to letting someone who's tried to bring outside opprobrium on someone else here stick around.
posted by tclark at 7:02 PM on December 13 [4 favorites]
I'm so sorry, SansPoint. I hope you and your friends stay safe.
posted by Pallas Athena at 7:03 PM on December 13 [3 favorites]
posted by Pallas Athena at 7:03 PM on December 13 [3 favorites]
"Bluesky is cooked. Now what?"
This feels a little too much like "Nobody goes there anymore, it's too crowded."
"There will always be assholes, thus there always must be cops. A platform with no cops is not a safe space. Full stop."
But but but my ACAB
"I don't think Bluesky is interested in that kind of moderation, but the alternative is letting asshole behavior fester on your platform."
Or giving everyone the power to set their own moderation policies and to disseminate them.
I mean, you can also ban them. Ask me how."
Uh, never have more than a few thousand active users at once? I mean, I like it here and generally like the moderators, but even under the more restrictive and lower volume current context, there's like a 600-comment Meta that's mostly just "why even have paid mods" and the guy who lasted the longest as the nominal dictator here mostly did it by not being super involved in the content day-to-day. And after you stopped doing it as a job, users still felt it was necessary to create an automated banned words list, and none of that seems to have stopped the site from losing active users and losing money. I like it enough here that I basically just decided that it is what it is, and that if I want to support it, it's better to just give money than read a Russian novel every week and try to convince people who prefer the equivalent of a small digital town to a virtual city that scaling moderation costs more than they'll ever be willing to pay.
"but the signal to noise now seems so bad"
SINGAL TO NOISE WAS RIGHT THERE, MITTENS!
posted by klangklangston at 7:17 PM on December 13 [8 favorites]
This feels a little too much like "Nobody goes there anymore, it's too crowded."
"There will always be assholes, thus there always must be cops. A platform with no cops is not a safe space. Full stop."
But but but my ACAB
"I don't think Bluesky is interested in that kind of moderation, but the alternative is letting asshole behavior fester on your platform."
Or giving everyone the power to set their own moderation policies and to disseminate them.
I mean, you can also ban them. Ask me how."
Uh, never have more than a few thousand active users at once? I mean, I like it here and generally like the moderators, but even under the more restrictive and lower volume current context, there's like a 600-comment Meta that's mostly just "why even have paid mods" and the guy who lasted the longest as the nominal dictator here mostly did it by not being super involved in the content day-to-day. And after you stopped doing it as a job, users still felt it was necessary to create an automated banned words list, and none of that seems to have stopped the site from losing active users and losing money. I like it enough here that I basically just decided that it is what it is, and that if I want to support it, it's better to just give money than read a Russian novel every week and try to convince people who prefer the equivalent of a small digital town to a virtual city that scaling moderation costs more than they'll ever be willing to pay.
"but the signal to noise now seems so bad"
SINGAL TO NOISE WAS RIGHT THERE, MITTENS!
posted by klangklangston at 7:17 PM on December 13 [8 favorites]
They can ban whoever they want for whatever reason. They could allow people to set posts to private. It's their site.
This would not solve all problems but would provide some protection for targeted people. The same people who got Bluesky where it is.
If they're not willing to do either, or give a shit about trans folks, then why would anyone take chances when they could be next?
posted by emjaybee at 7:56 PM on December 13 [2 favorites]
This would not solve all problems but would provide some protection for targeted people. The same people who got Bluesky where it is.
If they're not willing to do either, or give a shit about trans folks, then why would anyone take chances when they could be next?
posted by emjaybee at 7:56 PM on December 13 [2 favorites]
Uh, never have more than a few thousand active users at once?
This but unironically, but that's me coming back to my long-standing saw of "it's unethical to scale beyond what you have actual workable plans for moderation to handle" and that's kind of the ongoing fundamental sin of every social media platform that has tries to Get Huge. If you can't ethically manage scale, don't scale. But there's no money and no clout in not scaling, so people go for it anyway, and then the same old problems play out all over again and it's not the people chasing scale who pay the price, it's all the good faith users who were hoping things would be different this time.
But also, big platforms can still ban people. They can still make decisions. Bluesky could, in fact, just fucking ban Singal with no more justification than "hey, this person's behavior sucks and we don't want to host it". The problem is those decisions aren't gonna be compatible with financially and politically conservative growth-above-all approaches to chasing numbers. It's not surprising to see that come to an especially potent head close on the heels of the victory lap of the X emigration, but it's frustrating to see it play out anyway.
posted by cortex at 8:47 PM on December 13 [18 favorites]
This but unironically, but that's me coming back to my long-standing saw of "it's unethical to scale beyond what you have actual workable plans for moderation to handle" and that's kind of the ongoing fundamental sin of every social media platform that has tries to Get Huge. If you can't ethically manage scale, don't scale. But there's no money and no clout in not scaling, so people go for it anyway, and then the same old problems play out all over again and it's not the people chasing scale who pay the price, it's all the good faith users who were hoping things would be different this time.
But also, big platforms can still ban people. They can still make decisions. Bluesky could, in fact, just fucking ban Singal with no more justification than "hey, this person's behavior sucks and we don't want to host it". The problem is those decisions aren't gonna be compatible with financially and politically conservative growth-above-all approaches to chasing numbers. It's not surprising to see that come to an especially potent head close on the heels of the victory lap of the X emigration, but it's frustrating to see it play out anyway.
posted by cortex at 8:47 PM on December 13 [18 favorites]
Faine Greenwood is pretty active on BlueSky
Everything Happens So Much: Bluesky's L'affaire Singal + Butternut Squash Soup
posted by adamvasco at 6:19 AM on December 14 [3 favorites]
Everything Happens So Much: Bluesky's L'affaire Singal + Butternut Squash Soup
posted by adamvasco at 6:19 AM on December 14 [3 favorites]
I mean, "spread hate, you get banned" sounds like a good plan, but as with all of these, the devil is in the details.
Okay, ban this Singal dude, he's clearly a dick, ban anyone who posts Nazi shit. Get targeted by the "free speech warriors", but that's another thing. But what about the guy who is (or at least seems like) a "reasonable conservative" who might have what they believe (or can be made to sound like) a reasonable concern that isn't expressed hatefully? You know, "I'm all for freedom of expression, but what about society's overall stability?" 90% of the time, that's bullshit, but sometimes it isn't, or at least the person genuinely believes it isn't.
Then what about people cheering on the healthcare CEO's death and/or regarding it as regrettable but a legitimate means of political expression when all other avenues have been effectively foreclosed? Personally, I'm cheering the hell out of it, but it's hard to argue successfully that it isn't inciting hatred. But it's progressive hatred, so most people here and on Bluesky might have less of a problem with it.
Ultimately, it all comes down to "is this platform for everyone", or "is this platform for everyone except neo-Nazis" or "is this platform here for progressive values"? and then you get into the question of just what constitutes neo-Nazi or progressive. It's too complicated for AI moderation, real people moderation is too expensive, and community moderation inevitably gets into whose gang is bigger and/or more willing to go there. I just don't think social media really works once there's more than 10k or so people involved.
posted by outgrown_hobnail at 7:13 AM on December 14 [2 favorites]
Okay, ban this Singal dude, he's clearly a dick, ban anyone who posts Nazi shit. Get targeted by the "free speech warriors", but that's another thing. But what about the guy who is (or at least seems like) a "reasonable conservative" who might have what they believe (or can be made to sound like) a reasonable concern that isn't expressed hatefully? You know, "I'm all for freedom of expression, but what about society's overall stability?" 90% of the time, that's bullshit, but sometimes it isn't, or at least the person genuinely believes it isn't.
Then what about people cheering on the healthcare CEO's death and/or regarding it as regrettable but a legitimate means of political expression when all other avenues have been effectively foreclosed? Personally, I'm cheering the hell out of it, but it's hard to argue successfully that it isn't inciting hatred. But it's progressive hatred, so most people here and on Bluesky might have less of a problem with it.
Ultimately, it all comes down to "is this platform for everyone", or "is this platform for everyone except neo-Nazis" or "is this platform here for progressive values"? and then you get into the question of just what constitutes neo-Nazi or progressive. It's too complicated for AI moderation, real people moderation is too expensive, and community moderation inevitably gets into whose gang is bigger and/or more willing to go there. I just don't think social media really works once there's more than 10k or so people involved.
posted by outgrown_hobnail at 7:13 AM on December 14 [2 favorites]
“Tolerance is a peace treaty, not a suicide pact”
Tolerance only extends to those who are themselves tolerant.
And also, the Paradox of Tolerance:
“A truly tolerant society must retain the right to deny tolerance to those who promote intolerance.”
And finally, the parable of how a regular bar turns into a Nazi bar: the first Nazi is a “nice guy” and complains vehemently that it’s unfair you kick them out. If you don’t kick the first Nazi out, they slowly bring their friends, and well, then they stop being nice, and you’ve got a Nazi bar.
No matter how nice a Nazi is, nor how much they whine, kick them out.
Who you are is what you will allow, not what you profess.
posted by Freen at 7:52 AM on December 14 [10 favorites]
Tolerance only extends to those who are themselves tolerant.
And also, the Paradox of Tolerance:
“A truly tolerant society must retain the right to deny tolerance to those who promote intolerance.”
And finally, the parable of how a regular bar turns into a Nazi bar: the first Nazi is a “nice guy” and complains vehemently that it’s unfair you kick them out. If you don’t kick the first Nazi out, they slowly bring their friends, and well, then they stop being nice, and you’ve got a Nazi bar.
No matter how nice a Nazi is, nor how much they whine, kick them out.
Who you are is what you will allow, not what you profess.
posted by Freen at 7:52 AM on December 14 [10 favorites]
No one wants to and probably no one can run this right-sized bar with 50 million patrons.
For that matter right here banning the smugness of mastodon folks is really banning the center of this discussion. “No one comment here who said this exact thing would happen.”
posted by Wood at 8:56 AM on December 14 [1 favorite]
For that matter right here banning the smugness of mastodon folks is really banning the center of this discussion. “No one comment here who said this exact thing would happen.”
posted by Wood at 8:56 AM on December 14 [1 favorite]
Then what about people cheering on the healthcare CEO's death and/or regarding it as regrettable but a legitimate means of political expression when all other avenues have been effectively foreclosed? Personally, I'm cheering the hell out of it, but it's hard to argue successfully that it isn't inciting hatred. But it's progressive hatred, so most people here and on Bluesky might have less of a problem with it.
Are we comparing communities who exist solely to express the views of racial superiority and/or misogyny, with the range of so-called progressive responses to the murder of a health insurance CEO? I am seeing strong opinions but last time I checked there isn't some movement with generations of followers devoted to harrassment and violence toward an industry.
posted by ginger.beef at 9:57 AM on December 14 [1 favorite]
Are we comparing communities who exist solely to express the views of racial superiority and/or misogyny, with the range of so-called progressive responses to the murder of a health insurance CEO? I am seeing strong opinions but last time I checked there isn't some movement with generations of followers devoted to harrassment and violence toward an industry.
posted by ginger.beef at 9:57 AM on December 14 [1 favorite]
Ah, thank you.
posted by The corpse in the library at 11:07 AM on December 14
posted by The corpse in the library at 11:07 AM on December 14
bluesky/progressives have a real problem with class genocidal attitudes against health insurance ceos
which is just about the same thing as seemingly all of the people in and with power trying to eliminate trans people
there is no difference between the two sides, said the wise man
anyway, at this point given bluesky's moderation decisions I think I'll treat it much like metafilter: reducing the amount of posting, reducing the amount of personality I put in, etc
it's fine. the party was starting to wind down anyway
posted by i used to be someone else at 11:18 AM on December 14 [3 favorites]
which is just about the same thing as seemingly all of the people in and with power trying to eliminate trans people
there is no difference between the two sides, said the wise man
anyway, at this point given bluesky's moderation decisions I think I'll treat it much like metafilter: reducing the amount of posting, reducing the amount of personality I put in, etc
it's fine. the party was starting to wind down anyway
posted by i used to be someone else at 11:18 AM on December 14 [3 favorites]
Okay, ban this Singal dude, he's clearly a dick [...] But what about the guy who is (or at least seems like) a "reasonable conservative" who might have what they believe (or can be made to sound like) a reasonable concern that isn't expressed hatefully?
Singal is already that guy.
To him, and the center-right in general, the trans "activists" are not real people, they are a bunch of delusional freaks who pose a real danger to science, medicine, and policy. I think he loves this kind of drama. He is also generally anti-woke and loves any kind of let's call it tumblr-culture overreach like with whatever latest shitshow is going on in YA publishing in current year. He loves it! It pays him and makes him accessible to center-right people, and he's a pig in shit.
So part of him is just a sort of higher-culture version of Sargon of Akkad or other anti-woke YouTuber.
However, he does more than that. He extends his mockery and disgust to ALL trans-supporting scientists and advocates and journalists. He uses the social media craziness to attack all of the social and political power of trans people.
His goal is the complete annihilation of the political and ideological power of trans people. He believes that trans people are pitiful and broken and should only exist as medical and scientific subjects. He wants it back in the box. He wants institutional power over trans people but he wants those institutions to gatekeep the fuck out of it. (If they don't, then it must be because they are infected by wokeness and bad science, and they must be causing harm.. Saddam Hussein must be stockpiling the desistors in Tora Bora..).
When he is done playing internet shitlord, he can turn around and adopt the respectable-faced anti-trans concern troll kind of line that is his actual job. He's actually pro-transition, you see. He actually cares very much about trans people and wants what's best for them. This issue is so important, we must be very careful. So yes, of course some trans people can be allowed to transition, eventually, but the sad fact is that for many of them that will mean [things that look a lot like conversion therapy but if you call it that he will FUCKING DESTROY YOU]. Now we cis people can go back to our cis lives of never having to think about trans people or respect them.
I just want to be clear, he's not just an asshole who hates trans people on social media. He has also helped to shape the "reasonable anti-trans" line of rhetoric and he is on the front lines defending it as well.
posted by fleacircus at 5:00 PM on December 14 [6 favorites]
Singal is already that guy.
To him, and the center-right in general, the trans "activists" are not real people, they are a bunch of delusional freaks who pose a real danger to science, medicine, and policy. I think he loves this kind of drama. He is also generally anti-woke and loves any kind of let's call it tumblr-culture overreach like with whatever latest shitshow is going on in YA publishing in current year. He loves it! It pays him and makes him accessible to center-right people, and he's a pig in shit.
So part of him is just a sort of higher-culture version of Sargon of Akkad or other anti-woke YouTuber.
However, he does more than that. He extends his mockery and disgust to ALL trans-supporting scientists and advocates and journalists. He uses the social media craziness to attack all of the social and political power of trans people.
His goal is the complete annihilation of the political and ideological power of trans people. He believes that trans people are pitiful and broken and should only exist as medical and scientific subjects. He wants it back in the box. He wants institutional power over trans people but he wants those institutions to gatekeep the fuck out of it. (If they don't, then it must be because they are infected by wokeness and bad science, and they must be causing harm.. Saddam Hussein must be stockpiling the desistors in Tora Bora..).
When he is done playing internet shitlord, he can turn around and adopt the respectable-faced anti-trans concern troll kind of line that is his actual job. He's actually pro-transition, you see. He actually cares very much about trans people and wants what's best for them. This issue is so important, we must be very careful. So yes, of course some trans people can be allowed to transition, eventually, but the sad fact is that for many of them that will mean [things that look a lot like conversion therapy but if you call it that he will FUCKING DESTROY YOU]. Now we cis people can go back to our cis lives of never having to think about trans people or respect them.
I just want to be clear, he's not just an asshole who hates trans people on social media. He has also helped to shape the "reasonable anti-trans" line of rhetoric and he is on the front lines defending it as well.
posted by fleacircus at 5:00 PM on December 14 [6 favorites]
Fire Exits
The pain of bad content moderation is not evenly distributed. Typically, the people who get it worst are disfavored minorities with little social power, targeted by large cadres of organized bad actors who engage in coordinated harassment campaigns. Ironically, these people also rely more on one another for support (because they are disfavored, disadvantaged, and targeted) than the median user, which means they pay higher switching costs when they leave a platform and lose one another. That means that the people who suffer the worst from content moderation failures are also the people whom a platform can afford to fail most egregiously without losing their business.posted by Pyrogenesis at 11:46 PM on December 14
The pain of bad content moderation is not evenly distributed. Typically, the people who get it worst are disfavored minorities with little social power, targeted by large cadres of organized bad actors who engage in coordinated harassment campaigns...Can we acknowledge (with no disagreement to the source material or the person quoting it) that the folks in question speak in much more plain language?
It's going to be difficult to speak truth to power in these coming years if what we're speaking to power is a lot of collegiate-level polysyllabic words strung together in such a way that the average person can't even parse these complex paragraphs.
For example :
"It's difficult to stop assholes from being assholes. We just tell them to knock it off. If they continue, we stop them from having a large crowd"
posted by revmitcz at 1:29 AM on December 15 [1 favorite]
« Older AI CEO is as real as AGI next year. | Did the novels of the 20th century accomplish... Newer »
posted by mittens at 12:45 PM on December 13 [13 favorites]