Hacker News Reader

Comment by uniformlyrandom | Hacker News Reader

Well, duh. The problem is applying these policies - because blindly applying policies usually leads to mixed results (innocents banned, trolls using a loophole in policy and proliferating). But to quote the author -

> we have a way to prevent gangs of humans from acting like savage packs of animals. In fact, we’ve developed entire disciplines based around this goal over thousands of years.

We 'just' need to introduce institutes of online courts, judges, lawyers, and presumption of innocence (good thing that enforcement can be automated, so we do not need the execution squad). Also, you kinda need someone to write these policies, and approve them. Maybe an elected group of people - maybe even two groups, to balance the democracy/influence?

If you are not already doing it for your website, you are obviously an irresponsible moron.

View on HN

I get that you're being sarcastic, but to further emphasize your point:

As I understand it, Riot Games had something similar implemented -- a jury of peers called the tribunal to render decisions in order to punish bad player behaviour (griefing, hate speech, etc) and it still didn't scale to the amount of incidents and abuse reports they were getting nor did it filter out frivolous reports. They ended up switching to automated systems as a first line of defense against obvious bad actors anyways.

Did you see this: a random jury of your online peers https://www.minds.com/minds/blog/power-to-the-people-the-min...

I support this kind of stuff in theory but it is incredibly difficult to get to scenarios where this actually happens. You need to be massive scale for it to occur with any regularity.

Yes, - and a lot of online communities on the internet has reached that scale. Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Reddit...

In case of reddit, the problem is even more interesting. There are subreddits, so it is naturally segregated, and moderators and community are local. The communities can use downvotes to 'stone' an offender, and local elected moderators can enforce a ban. In case moderator or community mishandles the process, 'federal' admins can intervene. So we are pretty much at medieval level of justice there (much better than whatever constitutional dictatorship facebook and twitter have).

I deleted my Reddit account long ago. Opinion based downvoting is so toxic on small subreddits, and cannot be disabled in any meaningful way.

I deleted my account after someone who was obviously just being a dick to me in a subreddit got me temp banned for trying to reach out to them in a PM and be civil. The guy posted the message which was entirely civil and claimed it was harassment. No threats, no name calling, suggested based on his public posts that we had a lot in common and it looked like in another topic we might be good friends, how that leads to a site wide temp ban I don't know, but his completely dick, personally insulting comments because he disagreed about a software feature we're apparently wanted. Thanks Reddit I'll pass, honestly most social media is pretty much a cess pool which is why, present company excepted, I avoid it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com