Item — HN Reader

I’ve been using Reddit since the beginning, and I still use and like it, but your ban for saying “using php is stupid” comment resonates. One of my biggest Reddit pet peeves is downvoting or punitive mod action in response to subjective opinions.

It’s not a new problem, and it’s one that can happen in any forum with downvoting, but it drives me nuts. The downvote is not a disagree button!

3 comments

The downvote button is Reddit's second biggest problem. It was meant to signal that a piece of content was either off-topic or broke a rule, as a way to alleviate the pressure of moderation. That's a fine theory, but it's simply not possible in an anonymous and unaccountable environment. It increases the trolling and makes it easy for bad actors to both control competitor content and promote their own.

> The downvote button is Reddit's second biggest problem. It was meant to signal that a piece of content was either off-topic or broke a rule, as a way to alleviate the pressure of moderation.

That seems inaccurate. The up/down arrows feed the "hotness" algorithm, and it was never a means of moderation, but does have a side effect similar. You're probably confusing "curation" with "moderation". I can tell you with high confidence, being a mod of several big sub-reddit's, that I give zero-fucks about the up or down votes given to any item in the moderation queue.

Further more, the actual numbers for up/down votes is fuzzed by reddit, intentionally misreported to sabotage those who try to game the system. They mess with the feedback loop, making it harder to vote brigade.

> The up/down arrows feed the "hotness" algorithm, and it was never a means of moderation, but does have a side effect similar. You're probably confusing "curation" with "moderation".

That's not true. Downvoting[1] is absolutely intended to be a way to alleviate moderation duties, so that off-topic or inappropriate posts are made less visible and the moderators don't need to micro-manage every single comment.

> Further more, the actual numbers for up/down votes is fuzzed by reddit, intentionally misreported to sabotage those who try to game the system. They mess with the feedback loop, making it harder to vote brigade.

The vote fuzzing doesn't actually stop brigading at all. If it did, there wouldn't be any, yet everyone acknowledges that the vote gaming is ubiquitous and constant. Bad actors don't care about the numbers Reddit is reporting to them -- they vote until the desired effect is achieved, not until some standardized number of votes is hit.

[1] https://reddit.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/205926439-Reddi...

"Vote. If you think something contributes to conversation, upvote it. If you think it does not contribute to the subreddit it is posted in or is off-topic in a particular community, downvote it."

"Think before you downvote and take a moment to ensure you're downvoting someone because they are not contributing to the community dialogue or discussion. If you simply take a moment to stop, think and examine your reasons for downvoting, rather than doing so out of an emotional reaction, you will ensure that your downvotes are given for good reasons."

Slashdot's mod points award system had pretty good noise rejection, but it too eventually succumbed to the dumbening.

"Mod points award" is interesting. It basically incents the awardee to put quite a bit of thought behind their moderation decisions, but the flip side is that you get far fewer datapoints per comment. Perhaps there might be a way to use both systems concurrently.

It's still baffling to me that so many subreddits have rules against downvotes and use CSS hacks to hide the downvote buttons (that alternate clients or using the preference to disable custom CSS easily circumvents) and that Reddit just hasn't added that as core functionality for moderators to enable on a subreddit.

The only thing I can think of is that if they make it an option all subreddits will ban the downvote and for whatever reason admin must be really invested in ensuring people are able to downvote.

One of the clever things I noticed about HN is that you cannot downvote replies to your own comments. It's an interesting tweak.

On top of that the very recent rollout of changes to how blocking works are really wrecking havoc on debate subreddits where jerks are now using blocks to "win" debates.

>>The downvote is not a disagree button!

Downvote is a disagree button as it is perceived as such and that is an issue. Same functionality is in NH - it just has a higher treshold when you can use it, but not really that different in essence.

Banning for arguing is normal - from the times, when early web forums existed. Banning can be for any reasons - disagreeing with mod, arguing with someone, who is friends with mod. Mod is a god in forum. The solution to that is - either be a friend of mod or do not argue with idiots for idiotic reasons unless you are an idiot or simply want to be banned. PHP might be stupid or might not be stupid - who really cares in the end, when you log off from forum.

GP was not banned for arguing, they were banned for placing a throwaway arguing/flamebait comment - "using php is stupid" - in the proper context, by providing some nuance. The fact that they were even banned for that, when at most they should have been warned had they been actually arguing, tells you everything there is to know about how well that 'subreddit' is being managed (hint: not very well).

I've reread what GP was posted and he was banned for reason: personal attack, because he did say, that comment is stupid. For exactly the same reason you can get banned, if you use nuanced sarcasm or actually if you are touching anything that is toxic.

Warnings can not be sustainable, when such high volume of warned is involved - you have to keep records of those warnings. Since it is easy to create account in reddit, outright ban is a warning - to not to do the same with new account.

If you are a dick in RL and do snarly comments in RL, you will be banned from communication quicker than in reddit - in some cases even beaten up. So, the only approach is to use reddit and NH comments with attitude, that it is not real conversation.

> get banned, if you use nuanced sarcasm or actually if you are touching anything that is toxic.

I agree that this is a thing, of course. But it makes for very low quality discussion, since non-toxic users will just let the toxicity fester instead of engaging to mitigate it.

> you have to keep records of those warnings.

'Reddit Enhancement Suite' has that as a feature, and it could be added as such on the official site. Or it could be done unofficially in the "modmail".

> Since it is easy to create account in reddit, outright ban is a warning

Returning with a new account after being permbanned from a 'sub' counts as ban evasion, and will trigger a global site-wide ban for both accounts. Reddit has gotten very aggressive about this as of late, quite possibly using AI bots that will try to detect when such "ban evasion" is happening, and trigger global bans.

>>I agree that this is a thing, of course. But it makes for very low quality discussion, since non-toxic users will just let the toxicity fester instead of engaging to mitigate it.

I do not make rules of reddit(I feel that the discussion somehow has took that direction, where... I am defending reddit?) - I just speak from my experience.

There is a reason, why humans can not have on their mind more than one enemy - their brains can not keep track of all the enemies as keeping track of all of them is a nightmare scenario, where brainpower is used just to keep track of all of them. As long as mods are humans, there are no good solutions to keep track of all warnings - maybe AI can do that, but keeping all that information in head is too much garbage - if I have to manage any such forums, banning is the best option for warning, as my brains are not unlimited. If a person convinces, that he has learned a lesson, then the ban can be lifted. Some bans can even expire, so it does not really matter.

When I think of warning, it also has additional information: how long it has to stay, until it is forgotten(because it is not a ban), what that warning was about, because you can't really make warning to kid not to touch hot surface and scald for the same reason, if he touches electric power cable - they are completelly different cases, so I am looking from that viewpoint, that there does not exist proper warning system and 'Reddit Enhancement Suite' is not it as well - from the description it still sounds, that it is meant for banning - not warnings, where warnings are meant to educate and protect people. Warning system means a lot of involvement and without AI, that is not viable, especially when no one is going to pay you for that kind of job.

>>Returning with a new account after being permbanned from a 'sub' counts as ban evasion

Not, if you return with different email, as reddit can ban email, but not a person, so this rule can not be implemented to a person and can be read as guideline. Unless you are a complete idiot and post your id data and after being banned from sub, come back and state that you have returned, then that rule can be applied in that case. And I perceive that rule exactly how it is technically done - that they might ban account and maybe email, that was attached to it - rest takes too much effort and is not really possible to do by reddit(at this stage).

> I do not make rules of reddit(I feel that the discussion somehow has took that direction, where... I am defending reddit?) - I just speak from my experience.

I don't think you're "defending reddit", FWIW. I just wanted to push back lightly on some things you said. And I've also seen a system based on escalating "warnings" work very well at multiple places, including arguably here at HN!

> Not, if you return with different email ...

That's not what multiple users have said in the current discussion. Their AI bot watchdogs are a lot more trigger-happy than that these days. (Which is quite fine and well per se, since plenty of bans of spammers, grossly offensive abusers etc. are quite legitimate.)

Well I disagree but I understand your golden rule so I'll downvote you since this is the behavior you are requesting. Please note that I don't want you to reciprocate. To me downvotes mean I posted something irrelevant or forgot to be polite.

>>Downvote is a disagree button as it is "perceived as such"

Not because people are stupid and have one-dimensional thinking, but for the reasons, that textual information does not provide enough additional information, I always add additional information, if post is a joke.