this post was submitted on 09 Aug 2023
118 points (80.1% liked)
You Should Know
33019 readers
414 users here now
YSK - for all the things that can make your life easier!
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must begin with YSK.
All posts must begin with YSK. If you're a Mastodon user, then include YSK after @youshouldknow. This is a community to share tips and tricks that will help you improve your life.
Rule 2- Your post body text must include the reason "Why" YSK:
**In your post's text body, you must include the reason "Why" YSK: It’s helpful for readability, and informs readers about the importance of the content.
**
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding non-YSK posts.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-YSK posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.
If you harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
If you are a member, sympathizer or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- The majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.
Partnered Communities:
You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.
Community Moderation
For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.
Credits
Our icon(masterpiece) was made by @clen15!
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
AITA for thinking shadowbanning - as a concept - is actually a good thing?
It allows a sort of ban-on-probation. A way to isolate and observe in isolation whether someone exitibits ban-worthy behavior, while already protecting others from said behavior.
Yes, often banning would be preferrable. But I can also see why immediately going to hard ban is not warranted in many cases. Not everyone is an Alex Jones or a Donald Trump.
Now whether or not this specific case, or even Youtube's use of shadowbanning is good or bad... eh, different beast.
I can see where you are coming from, though I must disagree with the implementation of this system. Firstly, it's applying a de facto punishment without ever informing the target about them being punished in the first place. For all we know they might not even be aware they should refrain from certain behaviors. Secondly, they either did deserve a punishment or they didn't. It doesn't need to be a "ban or not ban" situation, I'm all for more nuance (a warning, a short-term ban, you get the idea), but we shouldn't just put anyone on probation just in case, just to observe them in isolation first.
Shadow Banning is very useful for spam bots. If you let them know they're banned, they'll just open a new account. But if YouTube keeps accepting their comments with a smile on its face before immediately tossing those comments into the shredder, it'll take some time before the bot figures out what's going on.
Good point, I didn't consider the bot scenario. I can see it working here. Same thing with very obvious bad actors. What I oppose is using it as a regular punishment for regular users just crossing boundaries.
We're not talking about habeas corpus, we're talking about the dubious ability to post on a private website's comments section that has been widely regarded as a cesspool for over a decade. As someone else in this thread pointed out, this is being taken too seriously.
It's an age old system that was called "cave the trolls" at first. If you let a problematic user know he is banned, he will simply create a new account.
Isolating the troll however frees up moderator time spending, as it will usually take a good while for the person to realize he is in fact isolated.
They should add dummy upvotes and AI generate replies to these troll's comments too. That would make it even harder to realize.
True, now with AI we have the ability to make shadowbanned people not realize for a long time that something has happened to their account. And as you say, it's far more efficient than just banning them.