Hacker News Reader

For what reason should we allow such leeway? No hosted platform in the 80s was responsible for a similar amount. Maybe if Meta can't properly police such a large platform it shouldn't be allowed to operate one. Facebook doesn't have to exist and we don't have to accept weak cries of "it's our best effort!"

View on HN

There should be leeway because sexual content is subjective and it gives a few chances to allow users to learn where the line is.

Let me clarify - why should we offer Meta leeway to implement such a flawed review system.

Why shouldn't we? It seems an incredibly difficult problem. They have reviewers who make subjective calls on subjective rules. The leeway not only gives the opportunity for the user to improve but also gives the reviewers leeway to flag borderline posts without harshly punishing users.

17 is a weird number but having a number is perfectly reasonable to me.

It's also possible that users could misuse the reporting system, in order to get other users' accounts suspended.

Requiring N distinct reports of a suspension reason would seem to reduce misuses of the reporting system.

The 17-reports threshold might have been found to balance type-1 and type-2 errors, as account removals are costly actions when made in error or as a result of reporting-system misuse.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com