My time here has come to an end (3 Viewers)

[Mrs. Rannous]

Everyone knows moderating is a thankless job. But I’m not sure most really understand the full picture. It’s one thing for people to message me, they'd like to “slit my throat” or warn me I better hope “I don't leave my children unattended” or message me asking if “trying to recommend a good taxidermist” replying to the news my mother had died. All unfortunately real things that have happened here.

I’ve heard you mention these things and it just sickens me to hear. Nothing I could say would do much good because they’re already heard statements and somebody deliberately said them. But I feel like lodging a public objection to anti-social and debased sentiments like these is important. Sorry you had to hear that, Joe. As if grief weren’t enough to deal with. It’s almost unspeakable, and we don’t accept that behavior from anybody nor think it’s in the realm of acceptability.

That, and how miserable do you have to be to believe that sort of thing is acceptable?

 

[Penguin]

Everyone knows moderating is a thankless job. But I’m not sure most really understand the full picture. It’s one thing for people to message me, they'd like to “slit my throat” or warn me I better hope “I don't leave my children unattended” or message me asking if “trying to recommend a good taxidermist” replying to the news my mother had died. All unfortunately real things that have happened here.

I’ve heard you mention these things and it just sickens me to hear. Nothing I could say would do much good because they’re already heard statements and somebody deliberately said them. But I feel like lodging a public objection to anti-social and debased sentiments like these is important. Sorry you had to hear that, Joe. As if grief weren’t enough to deal with. It’s almost unspeakable, and we don’t accept that behavior from anybody nor think it’s in the realm of acceptability.

That, and how miserable do you have to be to believe that sort of thing is acceptable?

@Joe Bryant That's just horrendous, so sorry you have to deal with that when you are providing a forum that's a loss leader at best. Even if it was a cash cow there's no place where this is acceptable.

I am really sad about the state of our society here and abroad. How'd it all get so bad and fall apart so quick?

Edit to add: Please no one answer that as it will end up going down a bad path which I didn't intend, just raw feelings when I posted

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

I wouldn't have nuked the Politics forum or banned political topics at the time. But I have to admit, Joe's decision to do so has probably improved my mental health (and God knows how long i'd have been banned for when Lauren Boebert was with that dude at a showing of Beetlejuice).

I've always said I wouldn't want to moderate this place, and I'm sure Joe made the right decision for his mental health as well.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I have a call Monday with a person I know who is a Reddit moderator. I'm interested to hear his take on the NY Times article talking about Reddit moderation mentioned earlier. Looking at the comments (always dangerous) on the Times article, there were a lot of contrasting takes to the author's views that were interesting. It's a tricky balance for sure.

If others have more insights or ideas or thoughts on moderation, please shoot me a PM or post here. Thanks.

 

[Uruk-Hai]

I have a call Monday with a person I know who is a Reddit moderator. I'm interested to hear his take on the NY Times article talking about Reddit moderation mentioned earlier. Looking at the comments (always dangerous) on the Times article, there were a lot of contrasting takes to the author's views that were interesting. It's a tricky balance for sure.

If others have more insights or ideas or thoughts on moderation, please shoot me a PM or post here. Thanks.

It would be interesting if you would share some thoughts from your conversations here once they've had time to settle.

 

[Ghost Rider]

I have a call Monday with a person I know who is a Reddit moderator. I'm interested to hear his take on the NY Times article talking about Reddit moderation mentioned earlier. Looking at the comments (always dangerous) on the Times article, there were a lot of contrasting takes to the author's views that were interesting. It's a tricky balance for sure.

If others have more insights or ideas or thoughts on moderation, please shoot me a PM or post here. Thanks.

My one idea has always been that the community should be made aware when anyone is banned and for how long. Having a pinned post where only moderators can post and list bannings as they happen would be ideal (not letting us post means it won't turn into debates as to whether it was fair or not). When a thread is going and someone suddenly stops posting, it can be a bit strange to others actively involved, and given that the sense of community here seems to be key and something you appreciate, I think it would make a lot of sense.

Otherwise, I think everything is great as is.

 

[AAABatteries]

Just spitballing but would it be possible to have the OP be a moderator for their own thread? They aren’t a universal mod, just on their threads.

 

[bigbottom]

I have a call Monday with a person I know who is a Reddit moderator. I'm interested to hear his take on the NY Times article talking about Reddit moderation mentioned earlier. Looking at the comments (always dangerous) on the Times article, there were a lot of contrasting takes to the author's views that were interesting. It's a tricky balance for sure.

If others have more insights or ideas or thoughts on moderation, please shoot me a PM or post here. Thanks.

From my perspective (and I certainly don’t see most things, much less everything), the forum seems to be running smoothly and is vastly improved in terms of eliminating ugliness and acrimony. In fact, the only threads with a fair amount of negativity seem to be threads like these.

Is it the Shark Pool where things are getting heated? I can’t imagine anyone sending you those despicable messages in response to your takes in the Netflix or stand-up comic thread.

 

[bigbottom]

I wouldn't have nuked the Politics forum or banned political topics at the time. But I have to admit, Joe's decision to do so has probably improved my mental health (and God knows how long i'd have been banned for when Lauren Boebert was with that dude at a showing of Beetlejuice).

I've always said I wouldn't want to moderate this place, and I'm sure Joe made the right decision for his mental health as well.

I couldn’t agree with this more. Following elimination of the PSF, I’m certainly less informed on political matters. I’m also in an infinitely better headspace on a day to day basis.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Everyone knows moderating is a thankless job. But I’m not sure most really understand the full picture. It’s one thing for people to message me, they'd like to “slit my throat” or warn me I better hope “I don't leave my children unattended” or message me asking if “trying to recommend a good taxidermist” replying to the news my mother had died. All unfortunately real things that have happened here.

I really hope these people are not active posters. This is disgusting.

These statements are horrible and it makes me feel bad to know that I'm sharing a board with people who would say things like that.

Unfortunately, this sort of thing is extremely common though. Everybody who achieves any level of personal notoriety on the internet receives death threats on a pretty regular basis. If they're female, they receive rape threats too. As far as I can tell, that is a nearly-universal experience. A significant chunk of our population is just kind of aggressively evil, and I don't think we pay enough attention to that fact.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

I have a call Monday with a person I know who is a Reddit moderator. I'm interested to hear his take on the NY Times article talking about Reddit moderation mentioned earlier. Looking at the comments (always dangerous) on the Times article, there were a lot of contrasting takes to the author's views that were interesting. It's a tricky balance for sure.

If others have more insights or ideas or thoughts on moderation, please shoot me a PM or post here. Thanks.

From my perspective (and I certainly don’t see most things, much less everything), the forum seems to be running smoothly and is vastly improved in terms of eliminating ugliness and acrimony. In fact, the only threads with a fair amount of negativity seem to be threads like these.

Is it the Shark Pool where things are getting heated? I can’t imagine anyone sending you those despicable messages in response to your takes in the Netflix or stand-up comic thread.

And let's be honest -- this thread is extremely friendly relative to the median PSF thread. A PSF thread entitled "Happy Holidays to You and Yours" would turn into a name-calling contest by page 3.

 

[AAABatteries]

I have a call Monday with a person I know who is a Reddit moderator. I'm interested to hear his take on the NY Times article talking about Reddit moderation mentioned earlier. Looking at the comments (always dangerous) on the Times article, there were a lot of contrasting takes to the author's views that were interesting. It's a tricky balance for sure.

If others have more insights or ideas or thoughts on moderation, please shoot me a PM or post here. Thanks.

From my perspective (and I certainly don’t see most things, much less everything), the forum seems to be running smoothly and is vastly improved in terms of eliminating ugliness and acrimony. In fact, the only threads with a fair amount of negativity seem to be threads like these.

Is it the Shark Pool where things are getting heated? I can’t imagine anyone sending you those despicable messages in response to your takes in the Netflix or stand-up comic thread.

And let's be honest -- this thread is extremely friendly relative to the median PSF thread. A PSF thread entitled "Happy Holidays to You and Yours" would turn into a name-calling contest by page 3.

It’s Merry Christmas, guy.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Just spitballing but would it be possible to have the OP be a moderator for their own thread? They aren’t a universal mod, just on their threads.

Not a good idea, IMO. Leaving aside the fact that it is probably impossible for the forum software to allow that (maybe I am wrong, but I would imagine it would be difficult), there are certain posters who treat it like sport to be the one to start certain threads, and giving them that kind of power would be a disaster.

 

[Desert_Power]

I have a call Monday with a person I know who is a Reddit moderator. I'm interested to hear his take on the NY Times article talking about Reddit moderation mentioned earlier. Looking at the comments (always dangerous) on the Times article, there were a lot of contrasting takes to the author's views that were interesting. It's a tricky balance for sure.

If others have more insights or ideas or thoughts on moderation, please shoot me a PM or post here. Thanks.

It's tangential, but wonder if you ever came across this story? Reddit has cracked down on that stuff a lot but it still has a ton of issues with porn and scams. Just interesting to look back on how far it has come since then.

I also used to know that moderator a bit personally so it was quite surprising when he got exposed/doxxed.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I have a call Monday with a person I know who is a Reddit moderator. I'm interested to hear his take on the NY Times article talking about Reddit moderation mentioned earlier. Looking at the comments (always dangerous) on the Times article, there were a lot of contrasting takes to the author's views that were interesting. It's a tricky balance for sure.

If others have more insights or ideas or thoughts on moderation, please shoot me a PM or post here. Thanks.

My one idea has always been that the community should be made aware when anyone is banned and for how long. Having a pinned post where only moderators can post and list bannings as they happen would be ideal (not letting us post means it won't turn into debates as to whether it was fair or not). When a thread is going and someone suddenly stops posting, it can be a bit strange to others actively involved, and given that the sense of community here seems to be key and something you appreciate, I think it would make a lot of sense.

Otherwise, I think everything is great as is.

Thanks @Ghost Rider. I think that makes sense and is a good idea and it's something we used to do. We stopped doing it for the most part though when it became a thing of giving the suspended poster something to brag about. It turned into a thing where they'd screenshot the warning and show it off like a trophy in other places when everyone highfived. So we stopped giving them.

It also would create additional posts either cheering or booing the action. Some would like it and others would do the "this place is almost dead as mods ruin the forum" thing.

So honestly, it was easier not to do them publicly.

But the downside is as you say, people don't know as clear what the "line" is. And I agree that's helpful.

Let us look there and see if it makes sense to try and change what we're doing. Thanks for the feedback.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I have a call Monday with a person I know who is a Reddit moderator. I'm interested to hear his take on the NY Times article talking about Reddit moderation mentioned earlier. Looking at the comments (always dangerous) on the Times article, there were a lot of contrasting takes to the author's views that were interesting. It's a tricky balance for sure.

If others have more insights or ideas or thoughts on moderation, please shoot me a PM or post here. Thanks.

It's tangential, but wonder if you ever came across this story? Reddit has cracked down on that stuff a lot but it still has a ton of issues with porn and scams. Just interesting to look back on how far it has come since then.

I also used to know that moderator a bit personally so it was quite surprising when he got exposed/doxxed.

Interesting. Thanks I had not seen that. That's wild.

 

[Joe Bryant]

These statements are horrible and it makes me feel bad to know that I'm sharing a board with people who would say things like that.

I'm not sure of course but I don't think many of the folks that sent the over the top stuff are still here. The other stuff with discouraging PMs that go poorly or misunderstood are different but that's just life I suppose. All good.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I have a call Monday with a person I know who is a Reddit moderator. I'm interested to hear his take on the NY Times article talking about Reddit moderation mentioned earlier. Looking at the comments (always dangerous) on the Times article, there were a lot of contrasting takes to the author's views that were interesting. It's a tricky balance for sure.

If others have more insights or ideas or thoughts on moderation, please shoot me a PM or post here. Thanks.

It would be interesting if you would share some thoughts from your conversations here once they've had time to settle.

 

[titusbramble]

Reddit is moderated?

 

[Joe Bryant]

Reddit is moderated?

Yes. Here's a NY Times article talking about Reddit moderation that's interesting. The comments (as usual) paint a different picture but that's life in comments. I'm interested in how they do their moderation there.

 

[titusbramble]

Thanks, but I have zero intention of giving any personal details to dying legacy media

In terms of moderation as a whole, speaking as having moderated multiple fora far, far bigger than FBG, a simple overriding rule of "play the post, not the poster" usually works perfectly. If you disagree with someone's point of view, attacking the point of view is fair game, attacking the poster making it isn't. This might be on account of those generally contra to my overall political standpoint having zero answers to reasonable discussion and just ignoring the question and trying to divert elsewhere, jumping straight to slurs, or both, I'll accept that much

 

[the moops]

Thanks, but I have zero intention of giving any personal details to dying legacy media

 

[Scoresman]

Can't someone set it up so that all of the harrassing PMs you recieve get forwarded to @shuke?

 

[titusbramble]

Thanks, but I have zero intention of giving any personal details to dying legacy media

You cannot read the article without signing up to a NYT account?

 

[Joe Bryant]

Thanks, but I have zero intention of giving any personal details to dying legacy media

In terms of moderation as a whole, speaking as having moderated multiple fora far, far bigger than FBG, a simple overriding rule of "play the post, not the poster" usually works perfectly. If you disagree with someone's point of view, attacking the point of view is fair game, attacking the poster making it isn't. This might be on account of those generally contra to my overall political standpoint having zero answers to reasonable discussion and just ignoring the question and trying to divert elsewhere, jumping straight to slurs, or both, I'll accept that much

This is a gift version that is free. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/21/...e_code=1.e00.AN0y.cVTGsj-B79Vz&smid=url-share

 

[Joe Bryant]

Can't someone set it up so that all of the harrassing PMs you recieve get forwarded to @shuke?

Now we're cooking...

 

[titusbramble]

Thanks, but I have zero intention of giving any personal details to dying legacy media

In terms of moderation as a whole, speaking as having moderated multiple fora far, far bigger than FBG, a simple overriding rule of "play the post, not the poster" usually works perfectly. If you disagree with someone's point of view, attacking the point of view is fair game, attacking the poster making it isn't. This might be on account of those generally contra to my overall political standpoint having zero answers to reasonable discussion and just ignoring the question and trying to divert elsewhere, jumping straight to slurs, or both, I'll accept that much

This is a gift version that is free. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/21/...e_code=1.e00.AN0y.cVTGsj-B79Vz&smid=url-share

Thanks Joe. Sadly the article doesn't really give a great deal of insight into what they have done other than basically nuke everything that is considered "hateful", which is always in the eye of the beholder and frequently actually interpreted as "content I just don't agree with", and then do what every sensible forum has done for the last 30 years, albeit with the incredibly fragmented nature of subreddits it is hugely open to abuse if you get bad apples with the banhammer

 

[Joe Bryant]

Thanks, but I have zero intention of giving any personal details to dying legacy media

In terms of moderation as a whole, speaking as having moderated multiple fora far, far bigger than FBG, a simple overriding rule of "play the post, not the poster" usually works perfectly. If you disagree with someone's point of view, attacking the point of view is fair game, attacking the poster making it isn't. This might be on account of those generally contra to my overall political standpoint having zero answers to reasonable discussion and just ignoring the question and trying to divert elsewhere, jumping straight to slurs, or both, I'll accept that much

This is a gift version that is free. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/21/...e_code=1.e00.AN0y.cVTGsj-B79Vz&smid=url-share

Thanks Joe. Sadly the article doesn't really give a great deal of insight into what they have done other than basically nuke everything that is considered "hateful", which is always in the eye of the beholder and frequently actually interpreted as "content I just don't agree with", and then do what every sensible forum has done for the last 30 years, albeit with the incredibly fragmented nature of subreddits it is hugely open to abuse if you get bad apples with the banhammer

I wondered too. I did think it was interesting as they've always had a huge number of volunteer moderators. Even back when the moderation was supposedly bad. Now they have a huge number of volunteer moderators, and they're the darling of the internet. Interesting.

 

[titusbramble]

Thanks, but I have zero intention of giving any personal details to dying legacy media

In terms of moderation as a whole, speaking as having moderated multiple fora far, far bigger than FBG, a simple overriding rule of "play the post, not the poster" usually works perfectly. If you disagree with someone's point of view, attacking the point of view is fair game, attacking the poster making it isn't. This might be on account of those generally contra to my overall political standpoint having zero answers to reasonable discussion and just ignoring the question and trying to divert elsewhere, jumping straight to slurs, or both, I'll accept that much

This is a gift version that is free. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/21/...e_code=1.e00.AN0y.cVTGsj-B79Vz&smid=url-share

Thanks Joe. Sadly the article doesn't really give a great deal of insight into what they have done other than basically nuke everything that is considered "hateful", which is always in the eye of the beholder and frequently actually interpreted as "content I just don't agree with", and then do what every sensible forum has done for the last 30 years, albeit with the incredibly fragmented nature of subreddits it is hugely open to abuse if you get bad apples with the banhammer

I wondered too. I did think it was interesting as they've always had a huge number of volunteer moderators. Even back when the moderation was supposedly bad. Now they have a huge number of volunteer moderators, and they're the darling of the internet. Interesting.

If they are the darling of the internet, then the first I've heard of it was about an hour ago. Maybe that's down to what I read these days

 

[Desert_Power]

Thanks, but I have zero intention of giving any personal details to dying legacy media

In terms of moderation as a whole, speaking as having moderated multiple fora far, far bigger than FBG, a simple overriding rule of "play the post, not the poster" usually works perfectly. If you disagree with someone's point of view, attacking the point of view is fair game, attacking the poster making it isn't. This might be on account of those generally contra to my overall political standpoint having zero answers to reasonable discussion and just ignoring the question and trying to divert elsewhere, jumping straight to slurs, or both, I'll accept that much

This is a gift version that is free. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/21/...e_code=1.e00.AN0y.cVTGsj-B79Vz&smid=url-share

Thanks Joe. Sadly the article doesn't really give a great deal of insight into what they have done other than basically nuke everything that is considered "hateful", which is always in the eye of the beholder and frequently actually interpreted as "content I just don't agree with", and then do what every sensible forum has done for the last 30 years, albeit with the incredibly fragmented nature of subreddits it is hugely open to abuse if you get bad apples with the banhammer

I wondered too. I did think it was interesting as they've always had a huge number of volunteer moderators. Even back when the moderation was supposedly bad. Now they have a huge number of volunteer moderators, and they're the darling of the internet. Interesting.

If they are the darling of the internet, then the first I've heard of it was about an hour ago. Maybe that's down to what I read these days

You should check out r/Soccer. It is the worst.

 

[mr. furley]

Reddit is moderated?

arbitrarily, i'd guess. there are, what, millions of sub-reddits and each of them has a handful of moderators. some topics are full of deleted comments with no explanation. others have a canned "your comment was deleted because of a rules violation" but each sub has their own rules.

reddit is just an umbrella over a collection of forums with the ability for users to hop between forums and it's inarguably a much more toxic, worse environment than FBGs by a longshot.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Reddit is moderated?

arbitrarily, i'd guess. there are, what, millions of sub-reddits and each of them has a handful of moderators. some topics are full of deleted comments with no explanation. others have a canned "your comment was deleted because of a rules violation" but each sub has their own rules.

reddit is just an umbrella over a collection of forums with the ability for users to hop between forums and it's inarguably a much more toxic, worse environment than FBGs by a longshot.

Thanks. I'm a novice with Reddit. But I was under the impression the moderating there was something to aspire to and the reason it saved the company and pushed it to 6billion+ value.

 

[pollardsvision]

Reddit is moderated?

A little off topic, but one of my favorite subreddits is r/roastmycar.

Pretty funny subreddit. People submitting their car to be roasted.

Anyway, the moderators will remove any positive comment, and remind you "if you don't have something mean to say, don't say anything at all".

 

[MTskibum]

Reddit is moderated?

arbitrarily, i'd guess. there are, what, millions of sub-reddits and each of them has a handful of moderators. some topics are full of deleted comments with no explanation. others have a canned "your comment was deleted because of a rules violation" but each sub has their own rules.

reddit is just an umbrella over a collection of forums with the ability for users to hop between forums and it's inarguably a much more toxic, worse environment than FBGs by a longshot.

Thanks. I'm a novice with Reddit. But I was under the impression the moderating there was something to aspire to and the reason it saved the company and pushed it to 6billion+ value.

Depends on the subreddit, the few I post at are quick to ban major violators and delete threads. Which is good, it keeps everything on topic.

 

[Mrs. Rannous]

Reddit is moderated?

arbitrarily, i'd guess. there are, what, millions of sub-reddits and each of them has a handful of moderators. some topics are full of deleted comments with no explanation. others have a canned "your comment was deleted because of a rules violation" but each sub has their own rules.

reddit is just an umbrella over a collection of forums with the ability for users to hop between forums and it's inarguably a much more toxic, worse environment than FBGs by a longshot.

Thanks. I'm a novice with Reddit. But I was under the impression the moderating there was something to aspire to and the reason it saved the company and pushed it to 6billion+ value.

Depends on the subreddit, the few I post at are quick to ban major violators and delete threads. Which is good, it keeps everything on topic.

I read "Am I the A**hole" subreddit. It is actively moderated, and reasons for removals etc. are given. Seems to work.

 

[massraider]

A little off topic, but one of my favorite subreddits is r/roastmycar.

Pretty funny subreddit. People submitting their car to be roasted.

Anyway, the moderators will remove any positive comment, and remind you "if you don't have something mean to say, don't say anything at all".

I don't think this is off topic. I think it one of the few places where moderation is a breeze, and that says something.

This sounds a little bit like the only Instagram page where I read comments.

MugShawtys

attractive women who have been arrested, acne the comments are basically rando guys pleading their case on why she should be released. That comment section is a community.

But that's rare

 

[Mr.Pack]

I just want to mention that the Chicago Bears suck and I hate them.

From what I've read here, flap agrees with you.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I just want to mention that the Chicago Bears suck and I hate them.

From what I've read here, flap agrees with you.

Full Circle.

 

[McBokonon]

Reddit is moderated?

arbitrarily, i'd guess. there are, what, millions of sub-reddits and each of them has a handful of moderators. some topics are full of deleted comments with no explanation. others have a canned "your comment was deleted because of a rules violation" but each sub has their own rules.

reddit is just an umbrella over a collection of forums with the ability for users to hop between forums and it's inarguably a much more toxic, worse environment than FBGs by a longshot.

Thanks. I'm a novice with Reddit. But I was under the impression the moderating there was something to aspire to and the reason it saved the company and pushed it to 6billion+ value.

Fundamentally, it's not really worth $6 Billion. That IS the market cap right now and the market is the boss, and the IPO went off, but it's trading at a value detached from it's 20-year trend of losing money and woeful attempts at monetization. Long-term, the stock is likely a loser. Like Twitter (pre-Elon and today), it's tough to target ads with precision there and that's really the only real to make money at either place outside of subs, and subs won't work.

I love reddit, use it all the time, but it's also a cesspool. Maybe the decision-making when it comes to moderation within a subreddit's rules is something to aspire to (I'm not sure I agree), but there's a ton of subreddits that are basically sex porn, violence porn, etc. The moderation is basically "that's the wrong kind of violence porn for this violence subreddit."

 

[Joe Bryant]

reddit is just an umbrella over a collection of forums with the ability for users to hop between forums and it's inarguably a much more toxic, worse environment than FBGs by a longshot.

Thanks. I think it also depends on the person that's judging. Some people are looking for different things. And of course with so many different forums there, I'm sure a lot of how it goes is dependent on the particular forum.

 

[Sand]

We stopped after someone threatened the moderator using his screen name. They were able to find out who he was and where he worked. Then contacted his employer and threatened him there at his real job because the poster felt the board was not fairly moderated. That was a while back.

I said way back then I didn’t want to put our people into that

Everyone knows moderating is a thankless job. But I’m not sure most really understand the full picture. It’s one thing for people to message me, they'd like to “slit my throat” or warn me I better hope “I don't leave my children unattended” or message me asking if “trying to recommend a good taxidermist” replying to the news my mother had died. All unfortunately real things that have happened here.

Geez. Sometimes I really hate people. Especially considering the vast majority of folks that I interact with here are pretty awesome persons.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I love reddit, use it all the time, but it's also a cesspool. Maybe the decision-making when it comes to moderation within a subreddit's rules is something to aspire to (I'm not sure I agree), but there's a ton of subreddits that are basically sex porn, violence porn, etc. The moderation is basically "that's the wrong kind of violence porn for this violence subreddit."

Thanks. And I'm with you in I'm not sure I agree their moderation is something to aspire to. That's just what I was told.

 

[Snotbubbles]

Thanks, but I have zero intention of giving any personal details to dying legacy media

In terms of moderation as a whole, speaking as having moderated multiple fora far, far bigger than FBG, a simple overriding rule of "play the post, not the poster" usually works perfectly. If you disagree with someone's point of view, attacking the point of view is fair game, attacking the poster making it isn't. This might be on account of those generally contra to my overall political standpoint having zero answers to reasonable discussion and just ignoring the question and trying to divert elsewhere, jumping straight to slurs, or both, I'll accept that much

This is a gift version that is free. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/21/...e_code=1.e00.AN0y.cVTGsj-B79Vz&smid=url-share

Some comments I found interesting from that article:

“Reddit focused on getting rid of users who were making things worse for other users, regardless of their politics.”

Meh. In other words don’t rock the boat. If you don’t agree with ideology pushed by subredit ( #antiwork is perfect example) and offer the tiniest of pushback you are banned without any explanation. I’m not interested in singing to the choir of like minded individuals. I want robust debate grounded in facts not feelings and Q fiction. For other low stake topics ( gardening, health issues, hobbies etc) it’s otherwise great.

As a long term Redditor, I think the author misses an important point. Unlike other social media platforms, it is really easy to avoid toxic content. Don't want to read alt-right nonsense? Don't subscribe to those channels. They will never intrude on your experience if you don't subscribe to them. While I have no problem with getting rid of the most toxic subreddits, the bad side of moderation is very real. That army of volunteer moderators bring with their own personal biases. Depending who is working at that time on that particular day, you may have content removed or face a ban simply by disagreeing with their position on the subject, having broken none of the site or sub rules.I still love Reddit, but I think most users see the "cleanup" as simply one step in making it acceptable for would-be shareholders, not necessarily better for users.

Reddit is a "trusted news source"? No it absolutely is not. First of all, it doesn't produce any journalism, it simply aggregates and shares articles from other, actual news sources. Second, the news subreddits are incredibly biased and work to create a total echo chamber. Who are the moderators of these news subreddits? They could be a college student in their pajamas for all we know. And yet they have the power to purge/bury (I mean "moderate") reporting they disagree with on a whim. There are no editorial standards or process.Reddit is great for hobbies, memes and niche interests. It's horrible as a news source.

 

[Snotbubbles]

Reddit is moderated?

arbitrarily, i'd guess. there are, what, millions of sub-reddits and each of them has a handful of moderators. some topics are full of deleted comments with no explanation. others have a canned "your comment was deleted because of a rules violation" but each sub has their own rules.

reddit is just an umbrella over a collection of forums with the ability for users to hop between forums and it's inarguably a much more toxic, worse environment than FBGs by a longshot.

Thanks. I'm a novice with Reddit. But I was under the impression the moderating there was something to aspire to and the reason it saved the company and pushed it to 6billion+ value.

Interesting to note, Reddit raised $750M in the IPO but reported a $140 million loss on $804 million of revenue last year. If Reddit continues to bleed money like that, the company will either go bankrupt or have to dilute the shares to raise money. Also, in one of the comments in the NYT article you posted, one of the comments said the original IPO valuation was $10B, then it went to $15B and eventually ended at $6.4B.

 

[Sand]

reddit is just an umbrella over a collection of forums with the ability for users to hop between forums and it's inarguably a much more toxic, worse environment than FBGs by a longshot.

Thanks. I think it also depends on the person that's judging. Some people are looking for different things. And of course with so many different forums there, I'm sure a lot of how it goes is dependent on the particular forum.

It does, I guess. I read through and interact on the gravel cycling and bikepacking subreddits and they're pretty awesome. Oh, and wallstreetbets, because the chaos is fun. Maybe I've just not hit the toxic ones.

 

[Sand]

Interesting to note, Reddit raised $750M in the IPO but reported a $140 million loss on $804 million of revenue last year. If Reddit continues to bleed money like that, the company will either go bankrupt or have to dilute the shares to raise money. Also, in one of the comments in the NYT article you posted, one of the comments said the original IPO valuation was $10B, then it went to $15B and eventually ended at $6.4B.

I wonder where their expenses go. They have an army of unpaid moderators. Do servers and bandwidth cost 900M per year?

 

[McBokonon]

Interesting to note, Reddit raised $750M in the IPO but reported a $140 million loss on $804 million of revenue last year. If Reddit continues to bleed money like that, the company will either go bankrupt or have to dilute the shares to raise money. Also, in one of the comments in the NYT article you posted, one of the comments said the original IPO valuation was $10B, then it went to $15B and eventually ended at $6.4B.

I wonder where their expenses go. They have an army of unpaid moderators. Do servers and bandwidth cost 900M per year?

Sales and marketing, Research and Development are large expenses listed in their financials. They're spending a ton on attracting users and figuring out how to monetize, basically.

 

[mr. furley]

Thanks, but I have zero intention of giving any personal details to dying legacy media

In terms of moderation as a whole, speaking as having moderated multiple fora far, far bigger than FBG, a simple overriding rule of "play the post, not the poster" usually works perfectly. If you disagree with someone's point of view, attacking the point of view is fair game, attacking the poster making it isn't. This might be on account of those generally contra to my overall political standpoint having zero answers to reasonable discussion and just ignoring the question and trying to divert elsewhere, jumping straight to slurs, or both, I'll accept that much

This is a gift version that is free. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/21/...e_code=1.e00.AN0y.cVTGsj-B79Vz&smid=url-share

Some comments I found interesting from that article:

As a long term Redditor, I think the author misses an important point. Unlike other social media platforms, it is really easy to avoid toxic content. Don't want to read alt-right nonsense? Don't subscribe to those channels. They will never intrude on your experience if you don't subscribe to them.

this is just not correct in my experience. i'm subbed to like 20 different topics but am seeing all kinds of topics/subs that aren't remotely close to any of my interests whatsoever and there's no way to block/hide them that i've found.

 

[Snotbubbles]

Interesting to note, Reddit raised $750M in the IPO but reported a $140 million loss on $804 million of revenue last year. If Reddit continues to bleed money like that, the company will either go bankrupt or have to dilute the shares to raise money. Also, in one of the comments in the NYT article you posted, one of the comments said the original IPO valuation was $10B, then it went to $15B and eventually ended at $6.4B.

I wonder where their expenses go. They have an army of unpaid moderators. Do servers and bandwidth cost 900M per year?

From their prospectus (the first number is 2022, the second is 2023)

Cost of revenue		104,799			111,011
Research and development		365,164			438,346
Sales and marketing		225,078			230,175
General and administrative		143,822			164,658

 

[New Binky the Doormat]

Research and development

365,164

438,346

LOL - yeah ...ok