How to manipulate an internet community while pretending to be impartial

submitted by Drewski from (i.imgur.com)

all 8 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]magnora7 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Upvoted. I try very hard to be mindful of this sort of thing.

The other side to this is that if there's zero moderation, then whatever group is the most dedicated takes over the forum's culture. Like what happened to voat, that wasn't a top-down thing. Whereas what happened to reddit mostly was a top-down thing.

So there's 2 ways things can become echo chambers, and we have to be careful about both. And finding the balance between those two things is why we have the pyramid of debate as a guide.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I think you're doing as good a job as is doable so far.

The challenge is that the mere mention of some verboten topics is enough to make some folks flee for greener pastures and cute kitty photos. I think this is the primary challenge for saidit. It can't attract a critical mass of normies without making some topics off limits, but it won't - so it won't attract normies. Sort of a catch 22. Normies are overrated anyways.

[–]magnora7 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Thanks. Yeah I kind of envision reddit keeping all the "normies" and voat taking all the hyper-extremists, and then saidit falling somewhere in between, with interesting debate of semi-edgy topics instead of a hivemind. I think we've been balancing that ok for now.

[–]comments 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Respectfully, I think SaidIt has a problem with this, just as described in the graphic.

The pyramid of debate rules as currently stated are subjective. It's easy to be confused about them or for people to have different ideas about what enforcing that means. Having now tried my hand for a bit at moderating, it's confusing to navigate as a moderator. They could be made way, way more clear. Then there's the fact that there is one sub that is openly getting special treatment and hosting.

I do think there is or has been differential treatment of people here based on your personal views. A big one is that low-pyramid stuff just seems kindof allowed if people are rich or powerful enough. Like people don't recognize that Bill Gates is human. You can speculate about how evil a group is and blame all problems and call them names as long as they are seen as rich or powerful.

That's why I think either an open statement of bias, or systematically enforced clear and unbiased rules are what's needed here.

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Kinda feels like how minorities are treated in an average society. They are made illegal for their differences. This reminds me of a line from the movie Twelve Monkeys "There is no right or wrong, there is only popular opinon".

[–]Drewski[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Via lvxferre on ruqqus

[–]whereswhat 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Fair enough.

[–]comments 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

this graphic is so good