Was this internal or a result of a mass flagging campaign?
It's one of the issues we have going against the left's hive mind mentality, they'll use numbers to trip the system till a human looks at it, sees it's bullshit and removes the report/suspension.
The way sites should be handling mass reporting is by internally marking the mass reported post as priority, and then if there is nothing wrong with the post then the mass reporters are dealt with based on what happened.
Mass reporting caused by genuine human error: Warn/temp ban users
To be honest, most sites are WAY behind in terms of UI, features and updating rules to deal with current issues.
Pirate and subscription only sites for content creators are more advanced than most large scale ones.
It could be deference because of shared ideology between the mass flaggers and site enforcers or could be the motivation to stop it isn't seen as a priority over other things (given Twitter got banned from Brazil and having to fight governments that can easily be understood) but this won't change soon.
It'd counter intuitive, you'd think more people and a larger organization means you can work on multiple projects. But in reality your ability to split focus shrinks as the size of the organization increases.
It's not even a criticism or a "flaw" it's just part of the logistics of really big numbers. It's hard to turn an aircraft carrier.
If it's mass reporting by a bunch of hivemind idiots, you don't necessarily need to ban them. Actual humans are expensive for a service to get, so I wouldn't expect any company to discard value like that.
But they should absolutely flag those accounts and reduce the weight of their reports, so it's worth less and less to the algorithm for mass reporting. They might even manage it by category, so they ignore reports from these accounts for 'Hateful Conduct' but still listen to them when it comes to reporting spam, CP, or stolen content.
The fediverse is the best alternative to twitter. I would suggest using poa.st. You can freely say what you want there, but the issue with fediverse instances is that you're at the whim of the admin and mods (like basically anywhere on the internet). One thing that should help fix this is a project called Revolver being developed by the admin of FreeSpeechExtremist. It's supposed to launch before the end of the year and be a decentralized version of the fediverse (like twitter) where you don't need to worry about pissing off the admins and instantly getting banned. We'll see about how well it actually operates though.
The rules of the game create the players. Any alternative that operates under the same systems will have a similar outcome.
Free sites gain all the users because the barrier to entry is low. Without a barrier, moderation is needed or the content degenerates. But the cost of moderation vs the profit from users just doesn't add up, so you have to find shortcuts. That means volunteer moderators and user report based actions. They're mostly good but you get a lot of moderators with extreme ideological motivation or external profit motives, and user reports are occasionally an angry political mob.
Every website is like this because it's the only solution we've found to "social media" equation that scales. You guys like to pretend it isn't but this site is exactly like reddit, complete with power tripping mods, group think and persistent trolls - because the site operates under the same rules.
Was this internal or a result of a mass flagging campaign?
It's one of the issues we have going against the left's hive mind mentality, they'll use numbers to trip the system till a human looks at it, sees it's bullshit and removes the report/suspension.
The way sites should be handling mass reporting is by internally marking the mass reported post as priority, and then if there is nothing wrong with the post then the mass reporters are dealt with based on what happened.
Mass reporting caused by genuine human error: Warn/temp ban users
User behavior shows extremist behavior: Ban
To be honest, most sites are WAY behind in terms of UI, features and updating rules to deal with current issues.
Pirate and subscription only sites for content creators are more advanced than most large scale ones.
It could be deference because of shared ideology between the mass flaggers and site enforcers or could be the motivation to stop it isn't seen as a priority over other things (given Twitter got banned from Brazil and having to fight governments that can easily be understood) but this won't change soon.
It'd counter intuitive, you'd think more people and a larger organization means you can work on multiple projects. But in reality your ability to split focus shrinks as the size of the organization increases.
It's not even a criticism or a "flaw" it's just part of the logistics of really big numbers. It's hard to turn an aircraft carrier.
If it's mass reporting by a bunch of hivemind idiots, you don't necessarily need to ban them. Actual humans are expensive for a service to get, so I wouldn't expect any company to discard value like that.
But they should absolutely flag those accounts and reduce the weight of their reports, so it's worth less and less to the algorithm for mass reporting. They might even manage it by category, so they ignore reports from these accounts for 'Hateful Conduct' but still listen to them when it comes to reporting spam, CP, or stolen content.
The fediverse is the best alternative to twitter. I would suggest using poa.st. You can freely say what you want there, but the issue with fediverse instances is that you're at the whim of the admin and mods (like basically anywhere on the internet). One thing that should help fix this is a project called Revolver being developed by the admin of FreeSpeechExtremist. It's supposed to launch before the end of the year and be a decentralized version of the fediverse (like twitter) where you don't need to worry about pissing off the admins and instantly getting banned. We'll see about how well it actually operates though.
The rules of the game create the players. Any alternative that operates under the same systems will have a similar outcome.
Free sites gain all the users because the barrier to entry is low. Without a barrier, moderation is needed or the content degenerates. But the cost of moderation vs the profit from users just doesn't add up, so you have to find shortcuts. That means volunteer moderators and user report based actions. They're mostly good but you get a lot of moderators with extreme ideological motivation or external profit motives, and user reports are occasionally an angry political mob.
Every website is like this because it's the only solution we've found to "social media" equation that scales. You guys like to pretend it isn't but this site is exactly like reddit, complete with power tripping mods, group think and persistent trolls - because the site operates under the same rules.
They planted sleeper cells amongst us, I fear we may never find them all