https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/gitwbo/p...
https://www.reddit.com/r/SubredditDrama/comments/gjedc1/uroo...
https://www.reddit.com/r/ThatsInsane/comments/gifi24/92_of_t...
In reddit parlance: "tfw internet points becomes more of a real thing, also <something something political>"
92 of the top 500 subs are controlled by 5 people. [0]
Yesterday this post was locked, and so many of the comments were removed by mods with no self-aware irony at all - I just checked and saw very few [REMOVED] posts, I think they removed the evidence they removed them - crazy. Check ceddit.
Two mods, Cyxie and AwkwardTheTurtle moderate 1196 subreddits. They have more control over content on reddit than Sinclair Media has over news stations.
[0] https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/fko21a/9...
I saw this and went to check - in the few subs i confirmed, they are not top mods. Top mods have the actual power, to assume that they are setting the agenda for every sub by being the 14th mod out of 28, or the 9th and so on is impossible, given how fractious moderating teams can be.
Drama is leaking into HN without anyone doing a sanity check on the claims.
This is the most important comment on this page. The reasons for this are varied, but it's pretty obvious that cultural changes have occurred on HN during this pandemic.
Right now, criticizing any of the “default mods” will get you banned, making any post like the one I referenced will be deleted, Reddit is engaging in censorship like they never have before.
Take a look at r/WatchRedditDie/ and tell me how it’s nothing.
That’s not even new.
That is also moving the goal posts- exactly the kind of stuff you see on Reddit and not on HN.
The point was about the claim- ‘ 5 people “controlling Reddit” ‘ and how it’s been absorbed and discussed without reflection.
Not about default mods banning people for meta drama.
I took cyxie, mentioned on the list and checked a few subs - they are not the top mod of any. It’s almost certainly true for all the other cases.
How is the claim “they control the news feeds” in any way substantiated ?
Looks more like power users playing subreddit Pokémon, and then doing nothing with the subs they are a part of.
He is not a top mod, being present on a mod list doesn’t imply control.
Someone of those power users was top mod for one of the subs I knew of - had 0 moderating impact or activity.
Cyxie is mod 14 on r/pics. Hardly a position of influence and power.
It’s not even a statement of actual harm- just that in case the teams don’t check, these guys could be getting away with removing stuff and therefore exerting some form of control.
There may be some kernel, of truth, just to be absolutely and needlessly generous with the claim.
However the truth is not going to be close, by a galactic mile, to the worthy of the drama with which this topic has been en-robed.
I‘ve been a mod. If a shadowy mod had the ability to enforce their will effectively over a single sub, let alone multiple teams - frankly they would be amazing and should write books on their team management, work ethic and obsession.
Why would they be? The whole point of reddit is that users can create communities with whatever moderation and content policies that suit them. People visiting the subreddit aren't prisoners, they can view another subreddit, start their own, or just abandon reddit altogether. Who cares?
You've explained that someone might voluntarily visit a website on the internet that contains partisan content, but you haven't explained why this is a problem. They're not trapped on reddit, they didn't pay a cover fee to enter, who cares?
As terrible and kneejerk as/r/politics may be, it doesn't need to be some neutral ground of perfect arbitration for many reasons, the least of which is that it would be asking an insane amount of work from its volunteer moderators. If it skews left who cares? There are plenty of places to discuss politics online that skew to the right.
Then advertise as such and don't pretend otherwise.
How is it misleading people? is /pol also misleading people?
every chance they get. it's more honest that way
I think it would be pretty neat to include metadata in the calculation of the voting power metric as well. Such as how each subscriber votes in relation to other subscribers and assign a higher score to those who vote inline with the community. The goal being to optimize for those subscribers who embody the spirit of the community. Of course that brings up issues of echo chambers but other kinds of metadata could be factored in to offset that too. I would have to think on it for a while to come up with something I felt was as meritocratic as possible.
I've seen a lot of great subs and communities take a pretty dramatic shift when the influx of new users is too great. It's basically the "eternal september" problem -- when the new users start to overwhelm the old users, they're no longer able to be effectively inducted into the community and the community makes a hard shift, usually to lower effort content as the quicker it can be consumed, the quicker it can be upvoted or otherwise appreciated (and usually it's quicker and more accessible to create than truly valuable content).
Or more straightforward--any community which experiences significant growth will eventually devolve into memes.
The one mitigating factor can be moderation (e.g., Hacker News). But if the mods can be replaced as well, then there's nothing holding it back.
This user was trying to gin up an outrage campaign over something (which looks to me to be) pretty obviously benign. And since the outrage campaign called out five specific users, and he persisted in it after being told off, he was banned for harassment. None of this seems unusual. And the only connection I see to the current thread is "Reddit moderation is controversial, so putting currency in to the mix will also be controversial."