513
514

Promote ideas, protect people (redditblog.com)

kn0thing[A] が 投稿

並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順q&a
あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]overallprettyaverage 1075 ポイント1076 ポイント  (456子コメント)

Still waiting on some word on the state of shadow banning

[–]TheCid 131 ポイント132 ポイント  (6子コメント)

Shadowbanning should be reserved solely for spammers. Using it on anyone else is just a hamfisted attempt to silence people, and we all know how well that works.

[–]nixonrichard 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (2子コメント)

And since it doesn't work on spammers (because they're generally good at what they do), there should be no shadowbans . . . ever.

コメントをもっと表示する (3 返事)

    [–]ImAtWorkBeNice 392 ポイント393 ポイント  (147子コメント)

    This guy got shadowbanned yesterday for talking about the CEO

    [–]Oxxide 203 ポイント204 ポイント  (25子コメント)

    for the love of god make that a no participation link, you almost got me shadowbanned.

    [–]OswaldWasAFag 134 ポイント135 ポイント  (8子コメント)

    Glad you can appreciate just how ridiculous that rule is.

    [–]NicholasCajun 49 ポイント50 ポイント  (6子コメント)

    I still don't know if I'm allowed to follow links to subreddits I already subscribe to and then vote and comment from that link.

    [–]Gimli_the_White 43 ポイント44 ポイント  (2子コメント)

    Only on days that are a prime number, or during the Andorran Festival of the Mountain Haggis.

    [–]nujabesrip 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (1子コメント)

    Yeah and they haven't exactly cleared it up, have they?

    I'm anti censorship. And anti hypocrisy. Why are subreddits like gamerghazi and shit reddit says not dismantled if this is all they do (harass and brigade).

    Frankly I don't trust this site, the admins, and the CEO that this is about harassment, rather than an in crowd an out crowd and protecting a narrative.

    [–]chibistarship 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    You aren't. If you follow any link on Reddit, you cannot vote or comment on it. I got shadowbanned that way.

    コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

      [–][削除されました]  (2子コメント)

      [deleted]

        [–]meeper88 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (1子コメント)

        And .... shadowbanned!

        edit: when I posted this, there was a certain message there along with a username; when you clicked on the username, you got the usual "page not found" message from shadowbanned accounts. Now, both the message and the account have been deleted.

        [–]greenduch 38 ポイント39 ポイント  (9子コメント)

        /r/announcements does not use np CSS and therefore I'm really unclear how an np link would make any difference for you? Its just a CSS hack made by users, not some magical thing that prevents shadowbans.

        [–]absurdlyobfuscated 12 ポイント13 ポイント  (2子コメント)

        RES and mobile apps have safeguards that prevent voting in np domain pages.

        [–]andytuba 10 ポイント11 ポイント  (1子コメント)

        RES fires warnings at you, but you have to manually turn on more restrictive safeguards. I know I've seen similar warnings on mobile apps but I didn't think any of them actively blocked you from participating without you explicitly turning on that behavior.

        コメントをもっと表示する (6 返事)

          [–]Caterpiller101 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (2子コメント)

          shhhhh I don't want anyone killed. Here

          Danger: it's wrong. I..... Tested it. I might be killed

          I upvoted a man in Reno just to watch him die. Now, every time I see a vote.... I lay my head down and cry.

          [–]Oxxide 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

          you have to include the http:// in the URL or reddit won't make it a proper link.

          [–]duckvimes_ 63 ポイント64 ポイント  (19子コメント)

          I'm just going to go against the circlejerk for a second and point out that there's no evidence he was shadowbanned for that comment. I see people posting things like that hundreds of times a day without getting shadowbanned.

          Edit to clarify: yes, he was shadowbanned. That does not mean he was shadowbanned because he wrote that comment.

          [–]go1dfish 53 ポイント54 ポイント  (5子コメント)

          The whole problem with a shadowban is that it eliminates all evidence.

          We can't go look at his history now.

          [–]duckvimes_ 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (4子コメント)

          Plenty of things wouldn't show up on his profile, though. Voting in linked threads, ban evasion with an alt, upvoting himself, etc.

          [–]meeper88 14 ポイント15 ポイント  (4子コメント)

          Guy currently above you in this thread repeated the message and is now also shadowbanned.

          コメントをもっと表示する (8 返事)

            [–]Bardfinn 73 ポイント74 ポイント  (13子コメント)

            That guy got shadowbanned for making an alternate account in order to evade a subreddit ban.

            [–]alexanderwales 105 ポイント106 ポイント  (3子コメント)

            Shadowbans are given without a reason being stipulated. There's not (to my knowledge) any log of who shadowbanned a user or why. There doesn't seem to be any accountability. The process is incredibly opaque (not "transparent"). So you can understand some reluctance to believe that he was shadowbanned for some totally different reason after making that comment, right? Given that we have no way of knowing why or when someone was shadowbanned, or who did it?

            [–]notdrunkinflorida 18 ポイント19 ポイント  (0子コメント)

            Oh, really.

            [–]478431188447 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (0子コメント)

            Do you have any proof of that?

            Even 4chan is more transparent than this place.

            [–]mki401 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (3子コメント)

            Since when is that shadowban-able?

            コメントをもっと表示する (3 返事)

              [–]krispykrackers[A] 48 ポイント49 ポイント  (74子コメント)

              Yeah. I can see how it totally looks like he got banned for that reason. It's just simply not true. He was banned for breaking a site rule. If we were truly trying to silence people talking about our CEO, we're doing a pretty terrible job of it.

              [–]Skulowllowleton 111 ポイント112 ポイント  (10子コメント)

              which rule did he break?

              [–]RobKhonsu 39 ポイント40 ポイント  (1子コメント)

              Who the fuck knows. What makes you think reddit wants to be transparent on the actions they take. You'd think they'd be making blog posts or something like that if they did.

              [–]the_beard_guy 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (0子コメント)

              But they talked about how transparent they are. People just don't lie like that on the internet. Thats like one of the 5 rules.

              [–]allthefoxes 19 ポイント20 ポイント  (6子コメント)

              They tend to keep that between them and the banned user

              コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                [–]_Dale_Gribble 60 ポイント61 ポイント  (3子コメント)

                Which rule?

                [–]rijl 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                I believe that was one was rule a38, subsection J, it reads:

                "Because fuck you, that's why"

                [–]forward4 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                I don't think anyone is at liberty to say, that is private information between the banned user and the admins unless the banned user chooses to make it known.

                [–]RamonaLittle 30 ポイント31 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                He was banned for breaking a site rule.

                But meanwhile other people who regularly break site rules -- and were reported multiple times to the admins -- haven't been banned. So yeah, of course people assume it's from talking about the CEO, not breaking site rules.

                And if the admins cared about site rules, they'd reply to mods who ask for clarification about how to apply them.

                The "rules" are BS unless they're clear and applied consistently, which they never have been.

                [–]GrayManTheory 23 ポイント24 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                we're doing a pretty terrible job of it.

                There are like 10 topics from the first page of your own link talking about deletions, censoring, and shadowbanning of members talking about her and her scheming husband.

                [–]RoHbTC 26 ポイント27 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                Which rule did he break?

                [–]SuperConductiveRabbi 51 ポイント52 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                Did he receive increased scrutiny due to the fact that he was sharing an opinion with which the admins might have taken offense? If so, is that not a case of selective enforcement?

                In other words, if someone broke a site rule by voting on something with sock puppets, but tended to stick to small subreddits rather than publicly criticizing Reddit, would that person have a smaller probability of being banned?

                From what I've seen, I'd tend to say that the people who share dissenting opinions are far more likely to be investigated for rule violations. It's also quite easy to slip up and vote twice on something if you use multiple accounts--I know, because I have multiple accounts and did slip up. What percentage of users break these rules? What percentage of those users are caught, and how many of those are caught because they attracted the attention of the admins due to their opinions?

                In my case, my (unintentional) slip ups were caught because a mod flipped out at my persistent-yet-civil counter arguments regarding a deletion of an article. He told me to suck his dick, twice. This garnered a backlash from other users, which caused the mod to say he was reporting his opponents to the admins. The admins then banned me, for a time. Had I not argued against a powerful user by sharing an opinion he didn't want to hear, I would not have been targeted for an investigation. What percentage of users could this situation apply to? I'm guessing a lot, as everyone should use multiple accounts, to keep personal details separate from controversial arguments.

                [–]_Guinness 10 ポイント11 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                "I see your tail light is out. Now we're going to have to search all of your posessions."

                [–]Peoples_Bropublic 34 ポイント35 ポイント  (3子コメント)

                Okay, so he was banned for breaking a site rule. I have a couple of questions regarding that. Would he have been banned if he had not made that comment, or was he only found to be in violation because he was under extra scrutiny for his remarks? Second, why was he shadowbanned rather than banned in the normal way?

                [–]Deathcrow 10 ポイント11 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                Second, why was he shadowbanned rather than banned in the normal way?

                I don't think there is any 'regular' ban. A shadowban AFAIK is the only kind of side-wide ban that exists. This is the case because Reddit used to be a haven for free speech and shadowbans were only used for illegal content or spammers (no need to be courteous to those).

                コメントをもっと表示する (2 返事)

                  [–]ImAtWorkBeNice 23 ポイント24 ポイント  (2子コメント)

                  You guys removed two of my comments that were anti pao. I don't believe you at all.

                  http://www.reddit.com/r/blog/comments/352twf/were_sharing_our_companys_core_values_with_the/cr0ikhi

                  [–]PM_ME_YOUR_CHURCH 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                  To quote the top response:

                  Call me a conspiracy-theorist theorist, but how do we know you didn't delete those comments yourself? If your comment had no replies and you deleted it, wouldn't it just vanish like this?

                  [–]ImAtWorkBeNice 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                  They are still in my comment history, they wouldnt be there if I had deleted them myself.

                  [–]jbusts 24 ポイント25 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                  1. All the top search search results are about moderators censoring any negative press about Ellen Pao. So you just successfully proved that A) you are trying to suppress the news and B) you're actually doing a very thorough job of it.

                  2. The "don't post personal information" rule is not relevant here, as Ellen Pao is a public figure and this is a newsworthy story. In fact here's an article about it from Vanity Fair - http://www.vanityfair.com/style/scandal/2013/03/buddy-fletcher-ellen-pao

                  3. Inb4 I get shadow banned.

                  [–]Skulowllowleton 53 ポイント54 ポイント  (8子コメント)

                  Buddy Fletcher, husband of Reddit CEO Ellen Pao, is being described as being the operator of Ponzi scheme ~144 million dollars of a pension fund was lost Ellen Pao is now accused of frivolous lawsuits to try and stay afloat and some other shit. Seeing as she is a CEO of a large company and has a fraudster for a husband I think it's safe to say we have a textbook ASPD/Sociopath on our hands

                  [–]notdrunkinflorida 10 ポイント11 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                  We're not stupid, he was the first one to start with the Ponzi scheme stuff and he got banned for it.

                  [–]Cortheya 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                  Which rule?

                  [–]ecafyelims 14 ポイント15 ポイント  (4子コメント)

                  So, he was banned for posting Reddit's CEO's full name? Does that qualify as "personal information?"

                  [–]almostalwaysafraid 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                  Which rule?

                  [–]nujabesrip 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                  A "site rule" with no specifics? Laughable. This really is spiraling out of your control and you keep making it worse.

                  [–]Weedwacker 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                  What rule?

                  [–]PAY_CLOSE_ATTENTION 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                  So it's just a coincidence that people who mention Ellen Pao, her husband, and their ponzi schemes keep being found to have broken site rules?

                  コメントをもっと表示する (24 返事)

                    [–]BrujahRage 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (11子コメント)

                    Um, I can see his comment, how's that a shadowban?

                    [–]dudenamedben 19 ポイント20 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                    Click on his username.

                    [–]BrujahRage 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                    I'll be damned, thanks.

                    [–]DuncanKeyes 15 ポイント16 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                    Click on his name, the profile is blocked.

                    [–]Dont-be_an-Asshole 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (7子コメント)

                    Mods can approve shadowbanned comments

                    [–]Kourkis 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (2子コメント)

                    So, you're saying that he has been shadowbanned by an admin for a comment that has been approved by an admin, is that right? /r/announcements is run by admins only, so only an admin could have approved his comment.
                    This means that he either voluntarily deleted his own account, or his comment offended at least one admin, and at least one other admin was supportive of his comment.

                    Edit: I was wrong, as pointed out by /u/ANewMachine615 shadowbans don't affect past comments, and if the user had deleted his account his username would be [deleted] as pointed out by /u/XXS_speedo.

                    [–]ANewMachine615 14 ポイント15 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                    Shadowbans are post-hoc effects. Basically, any future comments that person makes will only be visible to them. To get past comments, you have to remove them.

                    The entire point of the shadowban is that it's invisible. If existing comments with hundreds of upvotes suddenly disappeared, it'd be an ineffective tool.

                    [–]XXS_speedo 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                    Doesn't the user name show up as [deleted] if he deleted his own account?

                    コメントをもっと表示する (4 返事)

                      [–]notwhereyouare 135 ポイント136 ポイント  (54子コメント)

                      promote your ideas! as long as it follows our idea and these rules that we won't actually fully publish

                      [–]Patrick_Surtain 63 ポイント64 ポイント  (22子コメント)

                      I don't get why they even post these blogs anymore... the only way that it caters to people they want is if they only read the title and move on. The comments are brutal to the admins.

                      [–]AltLogin202 60 ポイント61 ポイント  (12子コメント)

                      They're pandering to advertisers. reddit is (rightfully) earning a negative reputation for some of its content and users.

                      Posting meangingless feel-good drivel like this makes companies feel better about making ad buys.

                      edit: when did this sub begin hiding the vote count for submissions? Fairly certain that started after the ridiculous "values" post. But it would not have mattered because that post had positive karma the first few hours. I know it was around +500 when I downvoted it.

                      [–]peacelovecarbs 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (11子コメント)

                      On October 31, 2006, Condé Nast acquired the content aggregation site Reddit, which was later spun off as a wholly owned subsidiary in September 2011. Codnde Nast owns a wide range of popular fashion magazines. They are dying out due to the internet, and they are using Reddit as an extension to reach the new internet based generations. Reddit will stand, it just won't be Reddit circa 2010. Hopefully this won't get me shadow banned...

                      [–]kn0thing[S] 12 ポイント13 ポイント  (10子コメント)

                      We are 100% independent from Condé Nast. Have been for a very long time.

                      [–]peacelovecarbs 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                      Reddit is owned by Advance Publications, which also owns Conde Nast. How are they 100% independent? And thank you for taking your time to reply.

                      [–]rwbj 12 ポイント13 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                      To clarify are you stating that neither Condé Nast or Advance Publications or any of their various affiliated companies currently have a controlling share in Reddit? Or are you stating that they have a controlling share, but an agreement with them makes it improbable that they will invoke said control?

                      [–]QuickPhix 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                      Lets not let facts get in the way of this.

                      [–]abs159 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                      This is misleading if not untrue.

                      Reddit was owned by Conde Nast.

                      Conde Nast is owned by Advanced Publications.

                      Reddit is now owned by Advanced directly (not via Conde Nast).

                      So, the people who owned Conde Nast owned Reddit then, as they do now.

                      And, for the record; "Freedom of press is limited to those who own one", (possibly) Mencken.

                      [–]Peoples_Bropublic 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                      Reddit is, however, not independent from Condé Nast's parent company, Advance Publications.

                      コメントをもっと表示する (4 返事)

                        [–]kn0thing[S] 16 ポイント17 ポイント  (7子コメント)

                        Why? Because we want to know what you all think. We know we've got work to do, but you're talking to someone who used to (back when there was only one reddit community) get front page stories that were basically "spez and kn0thing are idiots - why was the site down for the last 6 hours?!?!?!" -- we can take it.

                        [–]ucantsimee 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (5子コメント)

                        Why does the site STILL go down or 503 so often? What does all that gold pay for?

                        [–]intellos 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                        Unfortunately not every problem in computing can be solved by throwing more money at it. The site's original coding and infrastructure was never designed to handle 2 billion page views a month. Adding more servers has helped, but they still have more work to do on optimizing the back end.

                        [–]Ad__Hominem 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                        It's important to remember that it would take 140,000 reddit golds to pay Ellen Pao's compensation when she left Kleiner-Perkins. The compensation she literally sued over, because she felt she deserved more.

                        And she just happened to sue for over 33,000,000 reddit golds worth of cash, which is amazingly coincidental, considering her husband ran a Ponzi scheme that stole about 33,000,000 reddit golds worth of cash.

                        コメントをもっと表示する (2 返事)

                          コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                            コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                              [–]bolivar-shagnasty 10 ポイント11 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                              Also, we embrace free speech as evidenced by our allowing hate subs to spread like cancer. But we want to "protect people", whatever the fuck that means.

                              [–]ekjp[A] 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (29子コメント)

                              We allow a lot of content we don't agree with, we just want to make sure our platform makes everyone comfortable sharing their ideas, not just a few people. We believe less harassment means more ideas and more free expression, because people won't be afraid to participate.

                              [–]Ad__Hominem 13 ポイント14 ポイント  (5子コメント)

                              Seriously, how can you not recognize this as the kind of doublethink that it is?

                              If some people aren't uncomfortable, it's not free speech. The plain and simple of it is that you want heavy censorship for ideological reasons. You don't want to call it censorship, because that's not a cool or popular word right now. You want to censor unpopular people and posts, because unpopular people and posts might deter mainstream attention. As a person of color, it reminds me way too much of the historical "freedom" known as "separate but equal".

                              You are actually redefining freedom to mean the exact opposite of what it means. I really hate to use the comparison, but how do you call that anything other than Orwellian?

                              [–]NorsteinBekkler 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                              We allow a lot of content we don't agree with, we just want to make sure our platform makes everyone comfortable sharing their ideas

                              But this isn't doing that. You're telling reddit's users that certain ideas are not welcome. You're moving away from the hands-off approach mentioned in the blog post and towards direct intervention. I'm also skeptical of how you will enforce this. Someone was shaddowbanned yesterday for mentioning your husband's alleged Ponzi scheme, and when asked why in this thread we were told that he broke a rule, but not which one.

                              It seems like you want reddit to be a welcome place for people who agree with you only, and (ironically) it makes me feel less welcome here. Case in point - I hesitated to reply to you out of fear of getting shadowbanned for expressing a view contrary to yours.

                              [–]IReadYourStories 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                              I'm afraid to participate now, because I don't know what will get me in trouble and what wont. A bunch of /r/dota2 people just got recently shadow banned for unknowingly breaking rules by upvoting a post from another subreddit, but SRS still goes unmolested. The way I see it, reddit is a lot like the TV. If I don't like what's currently on, I'll change the channel. If I don't want to see pictures of dead kids, I'll go to another subreddit, but at least give me the freedom to make that choice.

                              [–]EllenPaosManHands 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (5子コメント)

                              How does my username strike you?

                              [–]Buttstache 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (4子コメント)

                              Makes you look childish as hell bud

                              [–]EllenPaosManHands 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (3子コメント)

                              Thanks, I wasn't sure I could match the maturity of "Buttstache". Besides, I wasn't asking you, now was I? ;)

                              [–]Buttstache 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (2子コメント)

                              Difference is, I didn't make my username to specifically insult one single person and then try my best to get them to respond to my lukewarm burn (man hands? Really?) Your actions are childish. And she's not going to respond to you. You know this.

                              [–]hansjens47 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                              The entire idea that harassment is a free speech issue is something serious people like the EFF are vocal about.

                              Sadly this sort of argument will go way over the heads of a lot of people.

                              [–]lamaksha77 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                              This reeks of scrubbing up Reddit to make it seem more whoreable to the advertisers/ sponsors.

                              Basically anything that leads one to "conclude that reddit is not a safe platform to express their ideas or participate in the conversation" can get the poster banned.

                              What does this mean? If someone is bashing up Ted Cruz for his politics and also because he looks like a slimy sack of shit, does that mean they will be banned because some Republicans don't feel like participating in this 'discussion'?

                              Isn't it pretty clear that this new update gives admins the right to be pruning down a lot of discussion, debate and free exchange of ideas?

                              [–]KaliYugaz 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                              I think a lot of Redditors don't appreciate that intimidation and harassment also have a chilling effect on free speech, and can be just as large a problem as tyrannical mods. At least censorious mods can be escaped by forming a new subreddit; you can't say the same for an angry cyber-mob that is intent on threatening and intimidating you into silence. Thank you very much for taking steps to address this problem, and please make sure the crackdown on harassment doesn't go too far in the other direction!

                              [–]remzem 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                              That's stupid. It's impossible for all ideas to make all people comfortable and removing harassment still isn't going to make people comfortable, unless you're conflating criticism with harassment (wouldn't be surprised). Part of the cost of having freedom of expression is making people uncomfortable. Imagine if these rules were implemented 50 years ago. How likely would it be for gay subs and opinions to be censored because it made people "uncomfortable" back then? All those sit-ins and other displays of civil disobedience during civil rights era probably made a lot of people feel harassed.

                              People need to grow up, they need to realize that people are going to disagree with their opinions. Exposing them to criticism is actually good for those opinions. If they can't survive criticism they're probably pretty lousy ideas. Kind of like the admin's ideas lately.

                              [–]DJ_HoCake 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (4子コメント)

                              This responsibility also falls on the user. If I have the belief of X and I got to a sub that believes in Y I should expect that the subscribers to that sub may react negatively. Its about finding the appropriate place to share and discuss.

                              コメントをもっと表示する (6 返事)

                                [–]kn0thing[S,A] 473 ポイント474 ポイント  (151子コメント)

                                I hear you. This was a product decision we made literally 10 years ago -- it has not been updated and it needs to be. Back when we made it, we had only annoying marketers to deal with and it was easier to 'neuter' them (that's what we called it) and let them think they could keep spamming us so that we could focus on more important things like building the site.

                                We've recently hired someone for this task and it will also be more user-friendly.

                                [–]hestonkent 173 ポイント174 ポイント  (91子コメント)

                                Any insight on when we might hear more about it? Glad one of you guys are finally responding to this issue.

                                [–]kn0thing[S] 247 ポイント248 ポイント  (89子コメント)

                                Soon as we have something to share. Admittedly, it was an ugly hack 10 years ago that's still being used -- that's a problem.

                                [–]hestonkent 98 ポイント99 ポイント  (85子コメント)

                                So, if I'm understanding right, the "ugly hack" is the system that is in place today, and you won't have anything to share until the system is updated?

                                Well at least that's good news for people who've been interested in seeing it change.

                                [–]kn0thing[S] 163 ポイント164 ポイント  (83子コメント)

                                Yes, I know it hasn't come soon enough. That's on us.

                                [–]matt01ss 35 ポイント36 ポイント  (27子コメント)

                                Shadowbans still work well for spammers/advertisers. I suppose a new "type" of ban will be needed.

                                [–]ErenBasukezu 49 ポイント50 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                I suppose a new "type" of ban

                                Like... a regular ban, with a regular message stating "You have been banned".

                                [–]Klathmon 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                So can you still login once banned?

                                Can i get all of my subreddits that i'm subscribed to if i get banned?

                                Can i access my comment/post/vote history when i'm banned?

                                What happens to all of my comments/posts if i'm banned, are they deleted? (if not do i have a way to delete them?)

                                What happens to my posts?

                                Is a ban per person, or per account?

                                Can i still use my account to report doxxing happening to me?

                                What happens if i am a moderator of a subreddit, what happens if i am the sole moderator?

                                There are probably a million other little questions that need to be answered. I agree that a better solution is needed, but it's not as simple as "flip a switch and it's done!"

                                [–]kn0thing[S] 58 ポイント59 ポイント  (23子コメント)

                                It's actually still used a vast majority of the time (north of 90%) on spammers/advertisers. I know it's an easy meme to latch on to, but that's the truth of it.

                                By my estimate, a significant percentage of the few people who do get banned and aren't spammers/advertisers, could be reformed if we just made it all more explicit -- that's what we're going to do.

                                [–]Dramatic_______Pause 22 ポイント23 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                How about adding a retroactive appeal process as well? My original account was shadowbanned after years with no idea why, and any message to admins goes unanswered...

                                [–]needless_insults 34 ポイント35 ポイント  (4子コメント)

                                And what about those of us who had accounts get shadow banned for unknown reasons and have been ignored by the admin team completely, to the point where we don't even know why we we're banned despite asking multiple times.

                                Edit: this direct reply will get ignored too.

                                [–]DownvotesAdminPosts 18 ポイント19 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                And what about those of us who had accounts get shadow banned for unknown reasons and have been ignored by the admin team completely

                                I'm one of those, too!

                                Edit: this direct reply will get ignored too.

                                sadly, yep

                                コメントをもっと表示する (3 返事)

                                  [–]GoreFox 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                  It's actually still used a vast majority of the time (north of 90%) on spammers/advertisers.

                                  Then do you guys respond to that 10% if they message you guys asking why?

                                  コメントをもっと表示する (16 返事)

                                    コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                                      [–]hestonkent 110 ポイント111 ポイント  (52子コメント)

                                      There's a mass mob mentality in this thread that'll probably end up torching your comments, but serious props for answering the question that's on a lot of people's mind, and admitting that there's a problem.

                                      Not many websites have that admin-to-end-user connection quite like reddit does.

                                      [–]kn0thing[S] 107 ポイント108 ポイント  (46子コメント)

                                      It's all good. I've seen a few of these in my day. Heh.

                                      I don't blame you for being frustrated with it -- it's a bad user experience and we lose plenty of otherwise great users because they just don't understand how the site works and have a bad user experience (with no explanation or clear reform process).

                                      [–]Adwinistrator 33 ポイント34 ポイント  (2子コメント)

                                      they just don't understand how the site works

                                      I was shadowbanned for voting on posts in a thread that I was linked to from another sub. I received no warning, just poof. I have been using this site for a long time, and did what most users end up doing. Reading discussions, voting, participating, following links, reading, voting, etc.

                                      The sub I came from was not some meta-sub, where people are directed to posts, it was just an example someone used in a discussion.

                                      I ended up in this small political sub, and ended up voting on posts based on the normal rules, I was upvoting well thought out posts and good points, and downvoting irrational and sensationalist posts that were diminishing the discussion.

                                      I was shadowbanned, and was never informed until a bot let me know.

                                      The admin I spoke with said I was part of a brigade...

                                      As far as I am concerned, unless the sub in question is some meta-sub, or the post you get linked from is inciting a brigade, simply following a link and participating in a sub you aren't a member of, is NOT a brigade.

                                      Just because a bunch of people did the same thing as me, does not make me part of some orchestrated group skirting reddit's rules. I was simply one person, perusing through reddit, voting on posts, and for that I was shadowbanned.

                                      [–]throwawaythedog 12 ポイント13 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                      Yea, if you ever follow a link to a sub you basically have to ban yourself from ever voting there for fear of being shadowbanned across the entire site. All of reddit is links to other things on the internet, but if that link is to another part of reddit you get banned for following it? Seems pretty stupid to me.

                                      [–]hestonkent 44 ポイント45 ポイント  (9子コメント)

                                      it's a bad user experience and we lose plenty of otherwise great users because they just don't understand how the site works and have a bad user experience

                                      So much this, thank you for saying it. According to the current rules, since my other account /u/CationBot is banned from /r/IAmA (due to their no novelty account rule, no other reason) then this account would technically warrant a shadowban because I have since participated in AMAs. I think some people would be upset if either accounts went missing. Maybe it's wishful thinking...

                                      [–]drocks27 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                      yep would be upset. You also do bring up a really interesting gray area . It's not like you were not welcome, but just one of your accounts falls into the not welcome group.

                                      [–]francis2559 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                      Can confirm, would be upset.

                                      [–]Seraph_Grymm 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (4子コメント)

                                      sub bans differ from site bans. there is no reason your non novelty account can't participate in iAMA, even if your other account is banned. there would be no technical reason to shadow ban, you weren't a spammer

                                      [–]adventure_dog 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                      That's a silly rule and must warrant many unnecessary bans

                                      コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                                        [–]EditingAndLayout 18 ポイント19 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                        http://i.imgur.com/V0u0S54.gif

                                        [–]HIT_BY_SNIPER 20 ポイント21 ポイント  (27子コメント)

                                        we lose plenty of otherwise great users because they just don't understand how the site works

                                        Or because they mention Ellen Pao's hus

                                        [–]ucantsimee 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (2子コメント)

                                        Not sure if username joke, or shadowban joke.

                                        [–]Gimli_the_White 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                        Or because they mention Ellen Pao's hus

                                        What's the big deal? It's not like you mentioned candlejack. I'm telling you - that is the fastest way to

                                        [–]HalfLightTim 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                        To the shadow-realm with you!

                                        コメントをもっと表示する (22 返事)

                                          コメントをもっと表示する (3 返事)

                                            コメントをもっと表示する (5 返事)

                                              [–][deleted] 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                              In the mean time, can people who have been shadowbanned actually get a response? Waiting multiple days to hear back about a ban is ridiculous, especially when you finally hear back and it's a completely bogus charge.

                                              コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                                                [–]mage2k 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                still being used

                                                • still being abused

                                                コメントをもっと表示する (2 返事)

                                                  コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                                                    [–]two_xjs 62 ポイント63 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                    wow an actual response to a shadowban question

                                                    [–]_____FRESH_____ 49 ポイント50 ポイント  (8子コメント)

                                                    New message: "Congratulations...you have been shadow banned!"

                                                    [–]leefna 29 ポイント30 ポイント  (11子コメント)

                                                    Is reddit, the product, a gun-wielding robot that goes around forcing admins to shadowban people?

                                                    [–]kn0thing[S] 31 ポイント32 ポイント  (9子コメント)

                                                    No. And there are no plans to add that feature.

                                                    [–]THROWMYBALLSAWAY122 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (3子コメント)

                                                    Can it be a candy wielding robot?

                                                    [–]Electric_Evil 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (2子コメント)

                                                    Something like this?

                                                    [–]THROWMYBALLSAWAY122 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                                    Can you replace the snickers with twix? not a fan of snickers

                                                    [–]steve1879 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                    Reese's Pieces FTW.

                                                    [–]Im_a_wet_towel 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                    What constitutes harassment? If I make an off-hand remark about someones mother, is that a ban? If I call someone a liar? If I tell someone they are being childish? If I say that someone deserved something bad that happened to them?

                                                    What if someone consistently posts information that I don't agree with, and I consistently voice my opinion?

                                                    The issue, to be, is that harassment has a very real possibility of being subjective, and I think clear a clear outline is necessary.

                                                    [–]speedofdark8 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                    booo! we want deadly robots! #badmin

                                                    [–]il_y_a_ilya 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                    This account is new but I'm just paranoid about leaving Internet history in general. I remember the reddit front page as a Haskell forum. I've hung around for a while.

                                                    This said, what is the product, Alexis?

                                                    In my book, reddit is going through nothing short of a conceptual crisis. It hasn't evacuated yet because there's no reddit killer around like reddit itself once disposed of Digg, caught with its own malconceived notions of the future it never got around to having.

                                                    And this much is clear by how much you're doing the blogs/announcements boogie in the past week. But you folk need to figure yourselves out first, man. You're acting more and more like a headless chicken by the day.

                                                    Now, don't just answer me point blank, Alexis. Your gang needs to do some actual thinking.

                                                    コメントをもっと表示する (2 返事)

                                                      コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                                                        [–]TotesMessenger 43 ポイント44 ポイント  (17子コメント)

                                                        This thread has been linked to from another place on reddit.

                                                        If you follow any of the above links, respect the rules of reddit and don't vote. (Info / Contact)

                                                        [–]GTS250 36 ポイント37 ポイント  (13子コメント)

                                                        /r/oppression? That's a thing?

                                                        [–]robotortoise 58 ポイント59 ポイント  (5子コメント)

                                                        I think it's ironic.

                                                        Edit: it is....both?

                                                        [–]Vmoney1337 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                                        Trust me, it's definitely ironic. They just do a great job at it.

                                                        [–]robotortoise 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                        The sidebar says it's both.

                                                        So, I guess it's Poe's Law, but also not?

                                                        [–]thefran 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (2子コメント)

                                                        Content here may be serious or satire.

                                                        It's both.

                                                        [–]robotortoise 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                                        Huh.

                                                        [–]eberkneezer 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                        It means you have to think a little for yourself and put things into perspective before grabbing your pitchfork.

                                                        [–]adventure_dog 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                        They also have a gone wild sub

                                                        [–]Fake-Empire 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                        Yeah, I kinda laughed out loud when I saw that.

                                                        [–]ronaldinjo 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                        Well, there's also /r/AntiAtheismWatch

                                                        [–]TheRighteousTyrant 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                        /r/ofcoursethatsathing

                                                        [–]thenuge26 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                                        There's LITERALLY nothing more oppressive than not being able to comment on a privately owned website.

                                                        コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                                                          [–]Jezamiah 10 ポイント11 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                          Some of these thread titles smh Soo sensationalist

                                                          [–]blahblahblahdkjdfgj 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                          Admin /u/kn0thing admits that for the last 10 years, they've been treating users like potential spammers and been punishing them with a nasty shadowban.

                                                          Oh good lord

                                                          [–]Gimli_the_White 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                          If you follow any of the above links, respect the rules of reddit and don't vote.

                                                          This makes no sense whatsoever. If I find a thread on my own I'm allowed to agree with it, but if someone points me to it, I'm not?

                                                          [–]overallprettyaverage 12 ポイント13 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                          It's awesome to hear you guys are looking at this critically. It seems that this is an issue that's bothering a very large number of users, and for good reason, now that you're pushing the transparency and freedom of speech thing. Maybe a blog post on this would put a lot of people at ease.

                                                          [–]Mid22 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                          More user-friendly is always nice to have. This is what I had to deal with when I was shadowbanned.

                                                          [–]klieber 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                          THANK YOU for acknowledging that it's an issue and that you're working on it. Even if it's not going to be fixed right away, at least hearing that it's on the radar, so to speak, is encouraging.

                                                          [–]absurdlyobfuscated 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                          Ten years ago? Is that right? I remember when people started noticing SB'd users showing up all over, and then only two years ago the feature to exclude them from the modqueue was added. Am I remembering wrong or had reddit been hiding this in a way less apparent to moderators... or what?

                                                          I have also been on the receiving end of an active ban, I know reddit is capable of handling users in a less passive way. Some five years ago, raldi banned me for something like an hour for using some scripts that I really shouldn't have been using, and every page I went to had a message and I couldn't see anything other than messages (specifically, this one). Why can't you do that instead of the passive-aggressive method you use now? That should be for spammers and especially abusive trolls. Things like voting in linked threads should be slaps on the wrist, an active ban like I got for a few hours, instead of being condemned to reddit hell.

                                                          [–]RedSocks157 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                          Who is gilding this shit?

                                                          コメントをもっと表示する (14 返事)

                                                            [–]AndroidL 79 ポイント80 ポイント  (5子コメント)

                                                            Yeah, I don't understand why they're ignoring this issue. According to the post, they 'value' "freedom of expression" and "open discussion". Shadow banning kind of goes against this. I'm not saying I disagree with shadow banning, but there needs to be a warning or some notifications. They also say they value "humanity". Imagine everyone you meet in your life pretends you don't exist and no one responds or talks to you - that isn't humane and is essentially what shadow banning is.

                                                            [–]Batty-Koda 49 ポイント50 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                            I'm not saying I disagree with shadow banning, but there needs to be a warning or some notifications.

                                                            Then yes, you ARE saying you disagree with it. The "Shadow" part of "shadow ban" means not having those things.

                                                            The reason it doesn't have those things is so spammers don't know to just to make a new account. Same deal for trolls and brigades. Whether or not you're okay with that, I don't know, but if you're going to not be okay with no-notifications, you are by definition not okay with shadow bans.

                                                            [–]Thesemenmaster 27 ポイント28 ポイント  (2子コメント)

                                                            They ignore it because they don't value "freedom of expression" nor "open discussion." They just want it to seem like they do.

                                                            [–]throwawaythedog 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                            Yea, the values blog post or whatever really rubbed me the wrong way. It's obvious that they were lying through their teeth for PR.

                                                            コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                                                              [–]kn0thing[S] 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                              Responded here btw!

                                                              [–]Bardfinn 139 ポイント140 ポイント x4 (33子コメント)

                                                              You're going to wait a very long time.

                                                              I'm not reddit; I don't work for them nor speak for them.

                                                              I'm a retired IT / programmer / sysadmin / computer scientist.

                                                              25 years ago I started running dial-up bulletin board systems, and dealing with what are today called "trolls" — sociopaths and individuals who believe that the rules do not apply to them. This was before the Internet was open to the public, before AOL patched in, before the Eternal September.

                                                              Before CallerID was made a public specification, I learned of it, and built my own electronics to pick up the CallerID signal and pipe it to my bulletin board's software, where I kept a blacklist of phone numbers that were not allowed to log in to my BBS, they'd get hung up on; I wrote and soldered and built — before many of you were even born — the precursor of the shadowban.

                                                              You will never be told exactly what will earn a shadowban, because telling you means telling the sociopaths, and then they will figure out a way to get around it, or worse, they will file shitty, frivolous lawsuits in bad faith for being shadowbanned while "not having done anything wrong". That will cost reddit time and money to respond to those shitty, frivolous lawsuits (I speak from multiple instances of experience with this).

                                                              Shadowbans are intentionally a grey area, an unknown, a nebulous and unrestricted tool that the administrators will use at their sole discretion in order to keep reddit running, to keep hordes of spammers off the site, to keep child porn off the site and out of your face as you read this with your children looking over your shoulder, your boss looking over your shoulder, your family looking over your shoulder, your government looking over your shoulder.

                                                              Running a 50-user bulletin board system, even with a black list to keep the shittiest sociopaths off it, was nearly a full-time job. Running a website with millions of users is a phenomenal undertaking.

                                                              I read a lot of comments from a small group that are upset by shadowbans, are afraid of the bugbear, or perhaps have been touched by it and are yet somehow still here commenting.

                                                              I think the only person that really has any cause to talk about shadowban unfairness is the one guy who was commenting here for three years and suddenly figured it out, and was nothing but smiles and gratefulness to finally be talking to people. I think he has the right attitude.

                                                              Running reddit is hard. If you don't want to be shadowbanned, follow the rules of reddit, and ask nicely for it to be lifted if you suspect you are shadowbanned.

                                                              [–]floor-pi 18 ポイント19 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                                              one guy who was commenting here for three years and suddenly figured it out

                                                              Holy shit.

                                                              [–]RamonaLittle 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                              they will file shitty, frivolous lawsuits in bad faith for being shadowbanned

                                                              Under what legal theory? No competent lawyer would take a case representing a spammer challenging a shadowban. You're talking nonsense.

                                                              the administrators will use at their sole discretion in order to keep reddit running, to keep hordes of spammers off the site

                                                              But that's not what's happening. This and other recent threads have been filled with many, many examples of people getting banned who shouldn't be, and others not getting banned who should be. And it shouldn't be nebulous. If they want the site to have certain types of content, they need to make clear what is or isn't allowed. But when people ask the admins to clarify policies, they don't reply.

                                                              I think the only person that really has any cause to talk about shadowban unfairness is the one guy who was commenting here for three years and suddenly figured it out

                                                              Many other people have been shadowbanned and can't get unbanned, or even an explanation as to why they were banned. And who knows how many other redditors are posting good content, but no one can see it because they don't know they're shadowbanned?

                                                              If you don't want to be shadowbanned, follow the rules of reddit, and ask nicely for it to be lifted if you suspect you are shadowbanned.

                                                              There are unwritten rules, unclear rules, and even the clear ones aren't applied consistently. And the admins don't reply to messages. So you're full of shit.

                                                              [–]Im_a_wet_towel 26 ポイント27 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                                              If shadowbanning only stopped spammers, or child porn, or whatever, then that would be fine.

                                                              But it doesn't. Shadowbanning is being used as a tool to direct conversations into desired directions. Modding is being used to direct conversation into desired directions.

                                                              I'm not doubting your expertise, I'm just saying that your post is a strawman at best.

                                                              [–]Ric_Adbur 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                              Also, since when has the "if you don't have anything to hide then you don't have to fear the law" argument ever been legitimate or used in any other context than to make excuses for unjust authoritarian practices?

                                                              [–]auxiliary-character 42 ポイント43 ポイント  (14子コメント)

                                                              Security by obscurity, yay!

                                                              [–]Bardfinn 32 ポイント33 ポイント  (7子コメント)

                                                              Security by null routing. It's used to combat email spammers, it's used to combat Denial of Service attempts, it's used to combat password brute force grinder bots. Tricking them into wasting their resources so they don't rework and refocus.

                                                              Real people can be identified, but only if they behave like real people, and participate in the community.

                                                              [–]auxiliary-character 18 ポイント19 ポイント  (6子コメント)

                                                              You will never be told exactly what will earn a shadowban, because telling you means telling the sociopaths, and then they will figure out a way to get around it...

                                                              The thing protecting you here is that the nature of shadowbans is obscured from the sociopaths. If that's not security by obscurity, then I guess I'm not sure what the phrase is intended to be used for.

                                                              [–]timewarp 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                                              Security through obscurity refers to the fallacious idea that one's system or network is secure just because bad actors have not found the system or are unaware of it's existence. It's like trying to protect yourself from bullets by keeping a low profile and hoping no one takes aim at you; sure, if you're a low profile target it may reduce the odds of you getting shot, but if someone aims at you, you're defenseless. There isn't anything inherently wrong with the idea, the problem is it's often all people rely on, giving them a false sense of security.

                                                              In any case, shadowbans are not an example of security through obscurity.

                                                              [–]auxiliary-character 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                              Except that's exactly what they're doing with shadowbans. The whole point is that the bad actors don't find out about the shadowban system by some "You're banned." message. If they knew about the system, they'd automate checks to see whether they're shadowbanned or not.

                                                              There isn't anything inherently wrong with the idea, the problem is it's often all people rely on, giving them a false sense of security.

                                                              If a measure taken for the sake of security doesn't provide security, then what is it?

                                                              コメントをもっと表示する (4 返事)

                                                                [–]AquitaineHungerForce 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (4子コメント)

                                                                "we're not going to tell you why you were banned, but since you were banned you must be a troll or a sociopath"

                                                                [–]DJ_HoCake 20 ポイント21 ポイント  (3子コメント)

                                                                Knock it off. That is not what he said at all.

                                                                [–]fiveguyswhore 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (2子コメント)

                                                                It was a nice/good comment. He did however whip out the "For the children" trope which to me has always been the Godwin's law of internet justifications. If you use it, you lose me. Good day, sir, etc.
                                                                 
                                                                My understanding is that dissenters to these sorts of policies aren't really objecting to banning child porn or spammers or revenge porn (that's a strawman-type deal). I find after I talk to them that they are worried about mission creep, and overuse of these tactics. Like what happened with Social Security numbers or the Patriot Act, or civil forfeiture laws.
                                                                 
                                                                He did speak truth when he said that "Running reddit is hard" and we had all better be able to agree on that point, but the slippery slope is easy to fall down and so we should be concerned about that as well.

                                                                コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                                                                  [–]NetWWWWWWWWWWWorking 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                                  They will file shitty, frivolous lawsuits in bad faith for being shadowbanned while "not having done anything wrong". That will cost reddit time and money to respond to those shitty, frivolous lawsuits

                                                                  right. Of course...

                                                                  The "troll sociopaths" aren't concerned with what earns a shadowban. They can easily check and have a sense of when it happens. It's no secret to them and they get around it by creating a new account. Shadow bans on reddit are completely dissimilar to your blocking of phone numbers and whatever other technology you worked on back in the day.

                                                                  How can one be expected to just "follow the rules" if they aren't explicitly stated? There are plenty of shadowbans given out to users to fall afoul to vote manipulation rules. Well, presumably, because shadowbans that people get for "brigrading" aren't actually found under that section of the rules.

                                                                  The problem isn't necessarily that shadowbans aren't made clear, but that they're found to be inconsistent. It's something that is often at the whim of the administrator. You might be vote manipulating one day but not the next. One user might but not the other. Was that personal information? One sub would have been nuked but not some other.

                                                                  It shouldn't be the responsibility of the userbase to discern rules from administrator actions.

                                                                  [–]IReadYourStories 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (3子コメント)

                                                                  If you have truly been in the industry for 25 years then I'm sure you realize that security by obscurity never works.

                                                                  [–]EllenPaosManHands 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                                  Things that work don't require a long-winded justification.

                                                                  [–]zellyman 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                                  What are you talking about, it works fantastically.

                                                                  コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                                                                    [–]Mashiki 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                                    seems like you had other problems. I ran a 3 node BBS that had 1100 active users, and in the 5 years that I ran it I think I banned one person for causing problems with a door program. Never even had a problem with FIDO:Net related mail, messages, boards or any other type of shitstorm.

                                                                    Shadowbans in my opinion are the cowards way of shuffling someone off to the side when you don't want to come out and say "you're banned."

                                                                    コメントをもっと表示する (7 返事)

                                                                      [–]christosoday 18 ポイント19 ポイント  (15子コメント)

                                                                      I would just like to know what EXACTLY calls for a shawdowbob! I see no exact rules about it, and literally saw someone get banned over saying a few names it seemed like.

                                                                      [–]Parks1993 54 ポイント55 ポイント  (18子コメント)

                                                                      Just don't mention Ellen Pao and you're good! Simple!

                                                                      [–]SRIRACHA_INA_URETHRA 42 ポイント43 ポイント  (3子コメント)

                                                                      That con artist from the news? Why not?

                                                                      [–]Searchlights 42 ポイント43 ポイント  (2子コメント)

                                                                      Because Buddy Fletcher, husband of Reddit CEO Ellen Pao, is being described as being the operator of Ponzi scheme after his now bankrupt firm diverted money for their own use and, according to the Chapter 11 trustee, committed fraud against investors. Three Louisiana pension funds lost $144 million.

                                                                      [–]MillenniumFalc0n 66 ポイント67 ポイント  (12子コメント)

                                                                      Do you actually believe they're shadowbanning people just for talking about her? https://www.reddit.com/search?q=ellen+pao&sort=relevance&t=all + the hundreds of comments about her in each of the last few blog/anouncement posts

                                                                      [–]Zarpar 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (7子コメント)

                                                                      Its not everyone, but it is happening (Example)

                                                                      [–]GoonCommaThe 50 ポイント51 ポイント  (3子コメント)

                                                                      Or more likely that user made an account just to post that and then did something else that would constitute a ban on purpose. If they were banning people for saying that then I wouldn't have to see so many idiots saying it today, yet here we are.

                                                                      [–]Peoples_Bropublic 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                                                      It's absolutely likely that the user also did something else which would constitute a ban. The question is if he was banned because of increased scrutiny due to his comment, a la the IRS targeting controversy.

                                                                      コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                                                                        [–]LolUmayyad 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                                        How do we know that's why he was banned?

                                                                        I mean, yeah, the nature of the ban prevents us from every knowing, since his entire history is gone, but this isn't necessarily proof. What if he had been spamming that and someone finally reported him?

                                                                        [–]robotortoise 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                                        It could be confirmation bias, though. We don't know if that guy voted on linked threads.

                                                                        [–]cdcformatc 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                                        That is obviously a throwaway account to get around a previous ban, which itself is a bannable offense. So now you have to look at the previous ban, and by the name I bet it isn't the first time this person has done this.

                                                                        コメントをもっと表示する (4 返事)

                                                                          コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                                                                            [–]killswithspoon 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (11子コメント)

                                                                            Shadowbanning is so fucking evil. If you're going to ban users from a sub, then let them know! A shadowban is the exact opposite of "transparent" and I won't take these blog posts (Or really, Reddit administration as a whole) seriously until this practice is revised.

                                                                            [–]TheCid 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (2子コメント)

                                                                            Subreddit mods can't really shadowban. (Well, they can set automoderator to delete every post by a particular user, but that's a pain in the ass and not widely done.)

                                                                            If a moderator bans you from a subreddit, you are notified if you are a subscriber or have posted on it. (This is so people can't just create tons of worthless subreddits and ban people who had never seen them before, annoying them with "you have been banned" messages - yes, this was an actual problem once.)

                                                                            [–]GoonCommaThe 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                                            You can't get shadowbanned from a subreddit. Just about every sub lets users know if they've been banned.

                                                                            [–]dcmcderm 13 ポイント14 ポイント  (4子コメント)

                                                                            The reason for shadowbans is so the spammer/marketer just keeps posting with that account and thinks that people still see it. If they knew they were banned they would just create another account.

                                                                            Not the most sophisticated solution by today's standards but that's why they did it. And they already acknowledged that they are working on fixing or replacing the system.

                                                                            [–]ItsMeCaptainMurphy 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                                            Except at this point it's only tricking the stupid ones (and I'm sure there are a lot of those) - most people now know what shadowbans are and how to detect it. Writing a bot to check the status of your accounts if you're goal is to spam advertising is beyond trivial. The excuse "this is stopping them from making another account" doesn't seem realistic anymore.

                                                                            [–]alexanderwales 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                                                            The reason for shadowbans is so the spammer/marketer just keeps posting with that account and thinks that people still see it. If they knew they were banned they would just create another account.

                                                                            The thing I don't get about this is that it's really, really easy to see whether you're shadowbanned. All you need to do is open up the user page with an incognito window. So all you're really doing is getting rid of the spammer/marketers who are stupid and don't know how reddit works.

                                                                            コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                                                                              コメントをもっと表示する (2 返事)

                                                                                [–]Crackmacs 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                                                                inb4 shadowban

                                                                                コメントをもっと表示する (5 返事)