[link] Who's Online | Find Members | Private Messages
Questions
Quizzes
Articles
My Journal
Forums
Quests. | Journs. | Gen. | News | Quiz | Links | TV | Music | Movies | Games | Sports | Sug. | Lit. | Jokes | Artcls. | Newb | O.S.
Inside R/Relationships, the Unbearably Human Corner of Reddit

Prev 1 2 3 Next (showing 1-25 of 68)

Back to Thread List
Bottom Last Post

12 days ago - Thursday 11/28/19 - 4:59:24 PM EST (GMT-5)
12 days ago - Thursday 11/28/19 - 7:07:02 PM EST (GMT-5)
I strongly suspect the Atlantic has fired all its copyeditors. This was written so clunkily.
12 days ago - Friday 11/29/19 - 2:58:33 PM EST (GMT-5)
from the article:

This was also when the site introduced the idea of quarantining communities: Any content that violates “a common sense of decency” wouldn’t be visible without logging in and deliberately seeking it out. (These pages also serve no ads and aren’t indexed in search results. The biggest recent example is misogyny den r/TheRedPill, which was quarantined in September 2018.)

this is a fair compromise for controversial content IMO. deplatforming something won't make it go away. but if you section it off in its own area and no ad revenue is being made from it, i think that's fair.
11 days ago - Friday 11/29/19 - 5:09:00 PM EST (GMT-5)
Actually, deplatforming does work. It's been shown on reddit in specific.
11 days ago - Friday 11/29/19 - 6:47:59 PM EST (GMT-5)
On Friday 11/29/19 - 5:09:00 PM birdsong4j wrote:
Actually, deplatforming does work. It's been shown on reddit in specific.


How are you figuring that it 'does work'? Please show some examples of things that went away as a result of being deplatformed.

11 days ago - Friday 11/29/19 - 6:49:57 PM EST (GMT-5)
...and are you considering anyone that has been wrongfully deplatformed because they posted key words that triggered the censor bots?
11 days ago - Friday 11/29/19 - 9:37:46 PM EST (GMT-5)
I've posted the article at least three times in response to Inquizitor repeating that falsehood, which shows how Alex Jones's viewership/readership declined by about 50% after he was kicked off most social media and YouTube, and had to rely on his own website that he hosts in order to attract people. I'm sure if you google the right stuff, you can find it, but I'm tired of having to provide the same evidence over and over again every time he claims "deplatforming doesn't work."
11 days ago - Friday 11/29/19 - 9:52:52 PM EST (GMT-5)
Alex Jones is still around...

...and you didn't address the issue of people being wrongfully 'deplatformed'.
11 days ago - Saturday 11/30/19 - 2:57:57 AM EST (GMT-5)
"Deplatforming works" can also mean the reach of the person/idea is greatly reduced. It's not an all-or-nothing thing.

And I'm not required to address everything you say.
11 days ago - Saturday 11/30/19 - 10:25:34 AM EST (GMT-5)
On Saturday 11/30/19 - 2:57:57 AM birdsong4j wrote:
"Deplatforming works" can also mean the reach of the person/idea is greatly reduced. It's not an all-or-nothing thing. And I'm not required to address everything you say.


No, you are not required to even respond to everything I say, but I would think that wrongful 'deplatforming' would factor in to the 'deplatforming works' equation. I wouldn't consider deplatforming as really working if it silences legitimate speech.

The 'make it go away' was the standard Inquiz used when saying that deplatforming doesn't work. You used a different standard in your claim that it does work.

On Friday 11/29/19 - 2:58:33 PM Inquizitor2 wrote:
deplatforming something won't make it go away.

11 days ago - Saturday 11/30/19 - 12:07:03 PM EST (GMT-5)
On Friday 11/29/19 - 9:37:46 PM birdsong4j wrote:
I've posted the article at least three times in response to Inquizitor repeating that falsehood, which shows how Alex Jones's viewership/readership declined by about 50% after he was kicked off most social media and YouTube, and had to rely on his own website that he hosts in order to attract people. I'm sure if you google the right stuff, you can find it, but I'm tired of having to provide the same evidence over and over again every time he claims "deplatforming doesn't work."


white nationalist groups are apparently still on social media despite them being banned.

also a family member posted pictures our relatives gathered from 1930s germany, in a family group, and was banned because the nazi swastika was in one of the pictures. no one in our family supports nazism or any type of bigotry.
11 days ago - Saturday 11/30/19 - 2:42:14 PM EST (GMT-5)
On Saturday 11/30/19 - 12:07:03 PM Inquizitor2 wrote:
white nationalist groups are apparently still on social media despite them being banned. also a family member posted pictures our relatives gathered from 1930s germany, in a family group, and was banned because the nazi swastika was in one of the pictures. no one in our family supports nazism or any type of bigotry.

If I'm not mistaken, you always have the option of censoring things like that out of photos before posting them. Platforms are not required to allow everything you think they should allow. Whether it's Facebook, Twitter, reddit, YT, or anywhere else, they have the right to have community standards that everyone must follow. When platforms actually started cracking down on horrible things (such as Alex Jones), it greatly diminished their reach.
11 days ago - Saturday 11/30/19 - 2:45:02 PM EST (GMT-5)
Another example is r/askHistorians - they full-stop, no questions asked do not allow any questions that even have a whiff of Holocaust denialism. If your standard is "it gets rid of the idea absolutely everywhere it exists online" then you have a totally impossible standard and aren't even worth engaging with in serious discussion. But disallowing questions along those lines has had an effect. It's a prominent group of historians just flat-out saying "this is not a serious line of inquiry and we do not even recognize that there is a debate to be had about the subject." That has power.
11 days ago - Saturday 11/30/19 - 3:02:51 PM EST (GMT-5)
I think there's a huge difference between having a picture flagged because it doesn't meet 'community standards' and having the member banned for posting the picture that doesn't meet 'community standards'.
11 days ago - Saturday 11/30/19 - 3:04:06 PM EST (GMT-5)
When people are wrongfully banned because they accidentally or inadvertently offend the censor bots means that deplatforming isn't working.
10 days ago - Saturday 11/30/19 - 3:44:42 PM EST (GMT-5)
How often does someone get deplatformed for something they accidentally say?
Nice strawman argument Mr sealion.
10 days ago - Saturday 11/30/19 - 4:12:55 PM EST (GMT-5)
On Saturday 11/30/19 - 3:02:51 PM CowDung wrote:
I think there's a huge difference between having a picture flagged because it doesn't meet 'community standards' and having the member banned for posting the picture that doesn't meet 'community standards'.


from what i remember, weren't people getting banned from facebook for reposting an award-winning picture from the vietnam war? that's the kind of thing i'm talking about.

i don't think my family posting pictures from my mom's great-aunt's collection (who died in june) was in any way meant to be racist or an endorsement of nazism. i miss the days when facebook was just a way to keep up with family and sharing photos. now it's some political landscape where you have to watch what you say or you get a 30-day ban, even when it's a legitimate complaint.
10 days ago - Saturday 11/30/19 - 4:33:51 PM EST (GMT-5)
On Saturday 11/30/19 - 3:44:42 PM postallbear wrote:
How often does someone get deplatformed for something they accidentally say? Nice strawman argument Mr sealion.


Inquiz just gave an example of a member being banned. On the Facebook banning Nazis thread, several examples were given where members get wrongly banned because their posts trigger the censor bots.

Probably happens more often than legitimate deplatforming.
10 days ago - Saturday 11/30/19 - 5:08:30 PM EST (GMT-5)
On Saturday 11/30/19 - 4:12:55 PM Inquizitor2 wrote:
from what i remember, weren't people getting banned from facebook for reposting an award-winning picture from the vietnam war? that's the kind of thing i'm talking about. i don't think my family posting pictures from my mom's great-aunt's collection (who died in june) was in any way meant to be racist or an endorsement of nazism. i miss the days when facebook was just a way to keep up with family and sharing photos. now it's some political landscape where you have to watch what you say or you get a 30-day ban, even when it's a legitimate complaint.

A photo winning an award does not mean it's acceptable to post anywhere you want. There are classic works of art that you can't post here, for example, because of nudity.
10 days ago - Saturday 11/30/19 - 5:17:07 PM EST (GMT-5)
On Saturday 11/30/19 - 3:02:51 PM CowDung wrote:
I think there's a huge difference between having a picture flagged because it doesn't meet 'community standards' and having the member banned for posting the picture that doesn't meet 'community standards'.

10 days ago - Saturday 11/30/19 - 5:40:23 PM EST (GMT-5)
On Saturday 11/30/19 - 3:44:42 PM postallbear wrote:
How often does someone get deplatformed for something they accidentally say? Nice strawman argument Mr sealion.
On Saturday 11/30/19 - 4:33:51 PM CowDung wrote:
Inquiz just gave an example of a member being banned. On the Facebook banning Nazis thread, several examples were given where members get wrongly banned because their posts trigger the censor bots. Probably happens more often than legitimate deplatforming.

Anyone who posts pro Nazi sentiment should get banned. Nothing wrong about that at all.
10 days ago - Saturday 11/30/19 - 6:11:03 PM EST (GMT-5)
On Saturday 11/30/19 - 4:33:51 PM CowDung wrote:
Inquiz just gave an example of a member being banned. On the Facebook banning Nazis thread, several examples were given where members get wrongly banned because their posts trigger the censor bots. Probably happens more often than legitimate deplatforming.


Any evidence for this claim, or are you just talking out of your ass (again)?
10 days ago - Saturday 11/30/19 - 7:46:59 PM EST (GMT-5)
On Saturday 11/30/19 - 3:44:42 PM postallbear wrote:
How often does someone get deplatformed for something they accidentally say? Nice strawman argument Mr sealion.
On Saturday 11/30/19 - 4:33:51 PM CowDung wrote:
Inquiz just gave an example of a member being banned. On the Facebook banning Nazis thread, several examples were given where members get wrongly banned because their posts trigger the censor bots. Probably happens more often than legitimate deplatforming.
On Saturday 11/30/19 - 5:40:23 PM postallbear wrote:
Anyone who posts pro Nazi sentiment should get banned. Nothing wrong about that at all.


Depends on how one interprets 'pro Nazi sentiment' doesn't it? Bird posted a pic of a Nazi pin that her grandfather acquired during WWII- - do you think it would have been right to ban her for it?
10 days ago - Saturday 11/30/19 - 7:50:06 PM EST (GMT-5)
If I had posted it on a platform that explicitly said "no photos of swastikas in any context, or you may be banned," then I would have no complaint about being banned for that.
10 days ago - Saturday 11/30/19 - 8:03:29 PM EST (GMT-5)
That's not what Postal said though- - he mentioned 'pro-Nazi sentiment', which could be interpreted to include the posting of the picture.

Prev 1 2 3 Next (showing 1-25 of 68)



You need to be logged in to post a reply

New to YT? Create a Free Account ~ Have an Account? Log In

Back to Thread List
Top

 
Edit