Hacker News Reader

Comment by sedatk | Hacker News Reader

Among the millions of entries on the platform, not one single piece of content on the platform was presented as evidence for the ban decisions. Just ambiguous words or false claims.

Shouldn't it be straightforward to prove that Eksi Sozluk lacks "meaningful moderation"? Shouldn't it be a requirement for such a drastic action like banning the whole web site?

Twitter produces orders of magnitude more disinformation in volume, amplified way faster and way broader too, yet they don't get any ban from Turkey whatsoever. How do you explain this kind of double standard?

View on HN

It should be pretty straightforward for you to show you have any moderation whatsoever, I dont believe you do. The whole of the site is full of rubbish.

If I were the Turkish government I would never even do the favour by banning the site, cause that draws attention the site doesn't deserve. I dont care if it's most visited site whatever, it's just useless.

Well, whenever we enter an evidence war like this we must go back to the old standard. The burden of proof is on the accuser. It has to be. If the burden of proof is always on the defendant, all you need is 30 people making accusations and it becomes impossible to defend against. It's basically a legal DDOS.

Also, i think every logical person can see that its much much easier to provide a single example of a lack of moderation than it is nebulous "prove you have moderation". What kind of standard do you have for that and how do we know you're not going to shift the goalpost the moment they bring you what you ask for. An example is an example is an example. Provide your proof or cease accusations. I've seen this argument many times in my country, always used to shut down free expression and enforce repression. There's great books and videos on logical fallacies out there

Lol no need for an essay, I didnt mean the service provider has to prove they have moderation to the officials. I meant just here, it would be easy to just say the site has moderation. I don't believe there is, which means it's a dumpster ground with everyone posting all sorts of trash. Which, by the way, is another reason the site shouldn't even warrant any attention, but obviously government officials are stupid to even bother.

Reframing what you just said, you think people should prove they are innocent against any accusation because it would be "pretty straightforward"?

Either you like authoritarian governments or you have it in for this website (or both?)

Funny you say that because Eksi Sozluk is the probably the only mainstream social platform to have site moderation logs open to all its users. There's a link to it under every page on the site. See it for yourself: https://eksisozluk1999.com/modlog

No other popular social platform has this level of transparency. Not Twitter, not Reddit, not Facebook. How did they prove they have moderation to Turkish government? How do they not get banned?

Do you know?

Do you want to know?

Do you care about what's right or fair, or do you just believe in something and want to justify your beliefs in whatever means necessary?

Based on your statements here, it sure seems like you care. What motivates you to claim otherwise?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com