| Forum Index > The Shopkeeper′s Inn |
|
Majax
France816 Posts
On May 12 2015 00:43 GrandInquisitor wrote: I just find it ironic that TL members are up in arms about this, when the whole reason TL exists today is because it was notorious for incredibly strict moderation standards. I think we can all agree that we are all for that. Emphasis on "standarts". | ||
GrandInquisitor
New York City13113 Posts
On May 12 2015 00:50 Carnivorous Sheep wrote: It's about posting standards. Reddit doesn't moderate posts except in rare occasions, and "low content" posting is the norm there. The difference between the posts that got deleted and the ones that got left up is basically only RL/Daily Dot/riotfreelol. All else being equal it's easy to see that's why those posts were deleted/the users banned. I don't understand -- I literally just linked you an entire page of RL/Daily Dot/riotfreelol spam posts that are still alive days after being posted. Your claim that "users are banned for merely mentioning RL" is therefore obviously untrue. More to the point though, are you saying those shouldn't be deleted? Because they totally should be, and in many cases they aren't. Reddit moderation standards are way too low, I agree, but that doesn't mean we shit on them for making it better. | ||
Carnivorous Sheep
Baa?21244 Posts
On May 12 2015 00:43 GrandInquisitor wrote: I just find it ironic that TL members are up in arms about this, when the whole reason TL exists today is because it was notorious for incredibly strict moderation standards. That's what you have to do to keep a forum healthy. Discussion forums go downhill when shitposting is tolerated instead of ruthlessly excised. I'm not up in arms about strict moderation standards (nor am I really up in arms or legs or any other limbs), but I think r/lol mods should be called out on their specious reasoning. The issue here is obviously not moderation standards/shitposting/etc., If they straight up said "I don't like RL I'm gonna ban him and anyone who mentions him" then sure, at least they're being upfront about it - their site their rules and I can respect that. r/lol mods instead keep changing their story/stance/reasoning every other post and hide behind the shield of "moderation standards" or some other silly reason when that's obviously not what this is about. On May 12 2015 01:06 GrandInquisitor wrote: I don't understand -- I literally just linked you an entire page of RL/Daily Dot/riotfreelol spam posts that are still alive days after being posted. Your claim that "users are banned for merely mentioning RL" is therefore obviously untrue. More to the point though, are you saying those shouldn't be deleted? Because they totally should be, and in many cases they aren't. Reddit moderation standards are way too low, I agree, but that doesn't mean we shit on them for making it better. As I said - they started banning but stopped when they realized the public backlash was too strong and they can't delete 5,000 posts every 10 minutes. | ||
|
Raneth
England527 Posts
Also, to clear something up no one is saying that RL being -banned- is him being harmed in an illegal sense (and if they are they are wrong), although it would certainly harm any content creator. The "harm" that is being discussed is the harm to his reputation based on their statements about him, such as doxxing threat etc, which he has shown to be false; that is unfounded damage to reputation. This is giving him a negative reputation among users who were not aware of the situation. That is harm to reputation, which is illegal. Whether you like RL or not, that is not what this is about, this is about: An organisation which claims a moral high ground, boasting itself as a platform for free discussion in order to make a profit, literally censoring someone because some mods had a fallout with someone. Legal or not, if the hypocrisy of that does not anger you, I don't know what will. Once again, this is not about if you like RL or not, this is not about if you think RL deserved a ban or not, this is about a self professed platform for discussion where the "community" decides what is good and what is not good. Policing what content is allowed to even be given a platform, based on personal bias, while claiming otherwise. EDIT: Also, comparisons to TL are completely unfounded, TL is not advertising itself in the same way as reddit. Part of the draw to TL is that the mods not only police posts and content, but that they do it well. Reddit runs the guise of a community driven environment and is acting against that by dictating content that the community is allowed to interact with. TL's ten commandments set the tone. EDIT: A couple typo's and clarifications | ||
|
GrandInquisitor
New York City13113 Posts
On May 12 2015 01:07 Carnivorous Sheep wrote: I'm not up in arms about strict moderation standards (nor am I really up in arms or legs or any other limbs), but I think r/lol mods should be called out on their specious reasoning. The issue here is obviously not moderation standards/shitposting/etc., If they straight up said "I don't like RL I'm gonna ban him and anyone who mentions him" then sure, at least they're being upfront about it - their site their rules and I can respect that. r/lol mods instead keep changing their story/stance/reasoning every other post and hide behind the shield of "moderation standards" or some other silly reason when that's obviously not what this is about. But they did do that. They said, we're banning all of RL's content and discussion related to that content is offtopic. I don't see where their story is changing, or what specious reasoning they're using. Don't claim that you would respect them for this, because they did exactly that and you obviously just disagree with their action. On May 12 2015 01:10 Raneth wrote: Once again, this is not about if you like RL or not, this is not about if you think RL deserved a ban or not, this is about a self professed platform for discussion where the "community" decides what is good and what is not good. Policing what content is allowed to even be given a platform, based on personal bias, while claiming otherwise. I think you have fundamentally misunderstood the situation. RL was banned from the subreddit before he picked a fight with the mods. He then got others to submit his work, and then engaged in a ton of fighting and feuding by proxy in the comments by having his twitter followers brigade the comment sections of each of his articles. Under the circumstances banning his content is both justified and reasonable. He brought it on himself. It's a little weird that this pseudo-democratic content aggregator now no longer features content from this one person, but honestly, it makes for a better environment, and the cost is well worth the benefit. Reddit is a community-driven environment, and it's the community that has chosen to reject RL. True, there wasn't a vote held or anything like that, but if the community actually cared about RL material that much, they'd go to RiotFreeLoL. The fact that they don't means that it doesn't matter to them enough. It's a community-driven environment run by some dictators, and yet everyone chooses to stay. And they choose to stay because that's the only way these community-driven environments are viable. The best subreddits on LoL (AskScience, AskHistorians) are ruled with an iron fist, and I wish leagueoflegends was more like them. | ||
|
AlterKot
Poland7525 Posts
| ||
|
Raneth
England527 Posts
On May 12 2015 01:33 GrandInquisitor wrote: Reddit is a community-driven environment, and it's the community that has chosen to reject RL. True, there wasn't a vote held or anything like that, but if the community actually cared about RL material that much, they'd go to RiotFreeLoL. The fact that they don't means that it doesn't matter to them enough. It's a community-driven environment run by some dictators, and yet everyone chooses to stay. And they choose to stay because that's the only way these community-driven environments are viable. The best subreddits on LoL (AskScience, AskHistorians) are ruled with an iron fist, and I wish leagueoflegends was more like them. What a ridiculous false dichotomy. The community is literally speaking up against the decision, but because they don't want to move from the current monopoly holder to a clearly inferior alternative they don't care? Are you seriously suggesting that? | ||
|
GrandInquisitor
New York City13113 Posts
On May 12 2015 01:41 Raneth wrote: What a ridiculous false dichotomy. The community is literally speaking up against the decision, but because they don't want to move from the current monopoly holder to a clearly inferior alternative they don't care? Are you seriously suggesting that? Are they actually speaking up, or are you just focusing on the posts that are complaining? You can't just conflate a few members of the RL twitter brigade with the community as a whole. Subscribing to RiotFreeLoL is easy and doesn't implicate network effects at all: it's literally just a button that says, "If this becomes a thing, I want to see posts from it." You don't have to unsub from the main subreddit: if you cared even one iota about RL, you could just sign up and continue using leagueoflegends. And yet despite months of spam and advertisement via Reddit and Twitter and Facebook, a frankly pathetic number of people have chosen to subscribe. That's how little most people care about RL or his content being banned. That's what I mean when I say the community chose to reject RL. As I described earlier, the xkcd subreddit chose to reject its moderators and moved to the hugely successful xkcdcomic subreddit instead. That was in a subreddit with literally automatic rules to permanently ban anyone that mentioned the xkcdcomic subreddit (or even the word "sidebar", since the sidebar included links to 9/11 trutherism and theredpill). So it's possible, it's just that people don't care to do it here because honestly, RL doesn't matter. | ||
|
Carnivorous Sheep
Baa?21244 Posts
On May 12 2015 01:33 GrandInquisitor wrote: But they did do that. They said, we're banning all of RL's content and discussion related to that content is offtopic. I don't see where their story is changing, or what specious reasoning they're using. Here is what they posted for the ban announcement - https://www.reddit.com/r/leagueoflegends/comments/33g6xs/subreddit_ruling_richard_lewis/ However, as time went on, it was clear that Richard was intent on using twitter to send brigades to the subreddit to disrupt and cheat the vote system by downvoting negative views of Richard and upvoting positive views. He has also specifically targeted several individual moderators and redditors in an attempt to harass them, leading at least one redditor to delete his account shortly after having his comment brigaded Already they're giving mixed messages - are they banning RL because he's "disrupting the voting system" (a la Ongamers) or are they banning him because he's harassing mods? OK, fine, maybe it's both, you can have two reasons, nothing wrong with that. But there was never any evidence provided of RL's supposed vote brigading beyond what is frequently done by many other prominent community members (linking on Twitter). If you want to ban people from linking to comments on Twitter, go for it, but instead it appears to be allowed for everyone except for this one guy who you just happen to not get along with. This accusation is obviously meant to try to link the RL ban to the Ongamers ban to drum up sympathy, since that ban is generally agreed to be proper. The ban is 100% because RL attacked some r/lol mods and the mods got scared. He was already personally banned on the subreddit for being abusive towards community members, which had no effect on his content. The content ban is retribution for RL's attack of some moderators. Again, this would be fine if this is what they opened with, but they tried to hide behind some pretense of vote brigading to try to justify the ban. We will also not allow any rehosted content from this individual. If we see users making a habit of trying to work around this ban, we will ban them. Fair warning. This is fine assuming this is what they actually do, which as we have seen is obviously not what happened. See the previously linked image- https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CDxNKlGVEAEbSaM.png:large This, and many other comments, definitely do not fall under "users making a habit of trying to work around this ban." In addition, the mods are wildly inconsistent with their enforcement of this "policy," which entails banning posts that mention RL, r/riotfreelol, or even jus tasking for a source, but then stopping when the public backlash becomes too great. Don't claim that you would respect them for this, because they did exactly that and you obviously just disagree with their action. I don't see how you could possibly know that since that is not what they did. I obviously disagree with the action but it's not on the ground of some moral outrage or fervent support of RL, but I do think it's important for the r/lol moderators to be called out on their duplicity. If you think the r/lol mods are blameless in thir then I have nothing left to say, that was the extent of my point anyways and if you disagree I doubt I can change your mind on it. I think r/lol has huge issues as a community in terms of identity, moderation, and influence, and I think it's important to point those out whenever the opportunity arises. | ||
|
Raneth
England527 Posts
(1) They market themselves as a forum for discussion where the community decides what is good/bad. With up/down votes. (If the community "chooses" there is content they don't want to see, they will down vote it.) This is unique from the more common system of moderation. (2) The mod team has decided to take it upon themselves to choose -for- the community by simply removing the content, any discussion about the content, or any discussion about if the removal of the content was just. (3) While there is nothing illegal about (2) it is in direct contradiction of (1) If the mod team wishes to enforce (2) it must accept that (1) is false and lose credibility as a result, rather than trying to censor content while maintaining some sort of air of supreme objectivity in an argument based on personal preference of some Mods. This is the issue. | ||
|
Sufficiency
Canada23833 Posts
I mean RL already said in this thread that the mods' info are fair game because they hold considerable power. Reddit has an obligation to protect the mods' interests and decided to ban RL. But it would be difficult to justify a ban based on perceived threats of releasing information (it might even be libel). So Reddit picked brigading instead. | ||
|
GrandInquisitor
New York City13113 Posts
On May 12 2015 02:00 Carnivorous Sheep wrote: Already they're giving mixed messages - are they banning RL because he's "disrupting the voting system" (a la Ongamers) or are they banning him because he's harassing mods? OK, fine, maybe it's both, you can have two reasons, nothing wrong with that. But there was never any evidence provided of RL's supposed vote brigading beyond what is frequently done by many other prominent community members (linking on Twitter). If you want to ban people from linking to comments on Twitter, go for it, but instead it appears to be allowed for everyone except for this one guy who you just happen to not get along with. This accusation is obviously meant to try to link the RL ban to the Ongamers ban to drum up sympathy, since that ban is generally agreed to be proper. The ban is 100% because RL attacked some r/lol mods and the mods got scared. He was already personally banned on the subreddit for being abusive towards community members, which had no effect on his content. The content ban is retribution for RL's attack of some moderators. Again, this would be fine if this is what they opened with, but they tried to hide behind some pretense of vote brigading to try to justify the ban. See here, you're saying: They didn't give any good reasons Actually they sort of did but I don't agree with those reasons Since they didn't give any reasons it's just retribution for his attacks Their reasons are pretty solid. He linked a bunch of comments and each time caused lots of downvote brigades. It happened over and over again, and he didn't explicitly tell them to do anything, but it seems clear he did it intending them to do it, and knowing they would do it. Other people do it, but none to the same extent, and more importantly, none that cause the same kinds of behavior. He was asked not to do it, and refused. Now you might not agree with those reasons, and think it's weird, but let's say Louis CK was petty enough to read the comments of all his posts in a certain subreddit, and then post to twitter certain flamewars between his fans and people who hate him, such that all of his posts ended up being giant shitshows where his fans mass upvote/downvote stuff, and that Louis CK did this over and over and over again, then that subreddit's moderators would probably have to take action too. RL is only "singled out" because he's the only person to have done this, apparently. It's kind of a weird arbitrary line, I agree, but life and law are full of weird arbitrary lines. Most of the time people can link to reddit discussions and be fine. Sometimes people abuse the system, and then they get punished for it, and then they'll point to unpunished similar behavior, and you have no perfect way to distinguish the two situations sometimes except for the "I know it when I see it" rule. I'm just not that troubled by that. It happens all the time in the justice system. That's the point of case law. You don't know where exactly the line should be drawn, but you do know that this particular case is over the line. On May 12 2015 02:00 Carnivorous Sheep wrote: This is fine assuming this is what they actually do, which as we have seen is obviously not what happened. See the previously linked image- https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CDxNKlGVEAEbSaM.png:large This, and many other comments, definitely do not fall under "users making a habit of trying to work around this ban." In addition, the mods are wildly inconsistent with their enforcement of this "policy," which entails banning posts that mention RL, r/riotfreelol, or even jus tasking for a source, but then stopping when the public backlash becomes too great. I agree these aren't "users making a habit of trying to work around this ban", but aren't there other reasons to delete posts? These seem to be justifiably deleted under the no-relation-to-lol rule. One of those posts is even pro-moderators and got deleted. On May 12 2015 02:36 Sufficiency wrote: I think the ban has 99% to do with RL threatening to release private information and maybe 1% with vote brigade. I mean RL already said in this thread that the mods' info are fair game because they hold considerable power. Reddit has an obligation to protect the mods' interests and decided to ban RL. But it would be difficult to justify a ban based on perceived threats of releasing information (it might even be libel). So Reddit picked brigading instead. Now I'm the one confused. Are we discussing RL's ban by Reddit as a whole, or by the leagueoflegends subreddit? I'm pretty sure Reddit as a whole didn't ban RL, as evidenced by RiotFreeLoL. As for the threatening to release moderator personal information, that surely does not help matters. Do you all think that that's a more justifiable reason to ban his content, or less justifiable? Or does it just meld together into a totality-of-the-circumstances thing? | ||
Chexx
Korea (South)11232 Posts
On May 12 2015 02:22 Raneth wrote: This whole conversation is redundant. The issue is: (1) They market themselves as a forum for discussion where the community decides what is good/bad. With up/down votes. (If the community "chooses" there is content they don't want to see, they will down vote it.) This is unique from the more common system of moderation. (2) The mod team has decided to take it upon themselves to choose -for- the community by simply removing the content, any discussion about the content, or any discussion about if the removal of the content was just. (3) While there is nothing illegal about (2) it is in direct contradiction of (1) If the mod team wishes to enforce (2) it must accept that (1) is false and lose credibility as a result, rather than trying to censor content while maintaining some sort of air of supreme objectivity in an argument based on personal preference of some Mods. This is the issue. I have the exact same view. | ||
|
TitusVI
Germany8319 Posts
Mabye new haircut and some minor face changes and he can again post on reddit. | ||
|
GrandInquisitor
New York City13113 Posts
Upvotes/downvotes just doesn't work as a system by itself. The best subreddits are heavily moderated subreddits like AskHistorians or AskScience. Under your theory, moderators shouldn't even exist. What if I just post porn to leagueoflegends, and let the community decide? Less extreme example, what if I just post image macros? You'd have a front page of a ton of garbage -- or rather, garbage even more garbagey than what's there now. A major subreddit once tried going moderation free for a month, removing only rules-violating or illegal posts. They lasted six days: http://www.reddit.com/r/SubredditDrama/comments/2f7qog/classic_in_2012_f7u12_began_a_month_of_no/ I guess my point is, a whole lot of content is already censored from your view. Adding one more, because its author is a big dickhole to the moderators and the community, isn't that big a deal to me. A truly free, democratic content aggregator is a pretty shitty thing. | ||
|
Chexx
Korea (South)11232 Posts
On May 12 2015 02:56 GrandInquisitor wrote: Upvotes/downvotes just doesn't work as a system by itself. The best subreddits are heavily moderated subreddits like AskHistorians or AskScience. Under your theory, moderators shouldn't even exist. What if I just post porn to leagueoflegends, and let the community decide? Less extreme example, what if I just post image macros? You'd have a front page of a ton of garbage -- or rather, garbage even more garbagey than what's there now. A major subreddit once tried going moderation free for a month, removing only rules-violating or illegal posts. They lasted six days: http://www.reddit.com/r/SubredditDrama/comments/2f7qog/classic_in_2012_f7u12_began_a_month_of_no/ I guess my point is, a whole lot of content is already censored from your view. Adding one more, because its author is a big dickhole to the moderators and the community, isn't that big a deal to me. A truly free, democratic content aggregator is a pretty shitty thing. Our point still stands if you say you are community driven and deletes thread which are apparently consumed by the community then it contradicts with your statement. It also doesnt make sense that you can link to post for sharing but can't share them on social media. | ||
|
Zdrastochye
Ivory Coast6262 Posts
On May 12 2015 02:56 GrandInquisitor wrote: Upvotes/downvotes just doesn't work as a system by itself. The best subreddits are heavily moderated subreddits like AskHistorians or AskScience. Under your theory, moderators shouldn't even exist. What if I just post porn to leagueoflegends, and let the community decide? Less extreme example, what if I just post image macros? You'd have a front page of a ton of garbage -- or rather, garbage even more garbagey than what's there now. A major subreddit once tried going moderation free for a month, removing only rules-violating or illegal posts. They lasted six days: http://www.reddit.com/r/SubredditDrama/comments/2f7qog/classic_in_2012_f7u12_began_a_month_of_no/ I guess my point is, a whole lot of content is already censored from your view. Adding one more, because its author is a big dickhole to the moderators and the community, isn't that big a deal to me. A truly free, democratic content aggregator is a pretty shitty thing. It's different if he's one of the biggest news reporters on the LoL scene. He posted the article on DD about Incarnat0n taking mid lane for C9, and you must've seen the shitshow with all the topics being banned and then reinstated once they dropped ties to DD and RL. It's just awkward for no real reason, because RL can still pick out reddit posts on social media and have his fans downvote them anyways, so their solution doesn't even fix one of the major two problems that they decided to ban his content for anyways. Banning RL for being a dick was totally reasonable, banning his content because of personal issues that arose between him and the moderators is criminally stupid. | ||
|
cLutZ
United States19574 Posts
On May 12 2015 01:06 GrandInquisitor wrote: I don't understand -- I literally just linked you an entire page of RL/Daily Dot/riotfreelol spam posts that are still alive days after being posted. Your claim that "users are banned for merely mentioning RL" is therefore obviously untrue. More to the point though, are you saying those shouldn't be deleted? Because they totally should be, and in many cases they aren't. Reddit moderation standards are way too low, I agree, but that doesn't mean we shit on them for making it better. I think the point of reddit is that moderation standards are low :-/ Some subreddits have strict rules, but within them people have much freedom, and outside of them things get immediately shut down. The /r/lol problem is that even before the content ban, they had an unwritten set of rules that read "unless you are RLewis". Then they sprung that invisible ruleset in the content ban announcement. Also that one post Chexx quoted. | ||
|
wei2coolman
United States60033 Posts
At this point, the subreddit is literally Harry Potter, in which RL is "He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named". | ||
|
Sufficiency
Canada23833 Posts
On May 12 2015 02:44 GrandInquisitor wrote: See here, you're saying: They didn't give any good reasons Actually they sort of did but I don't agree with those reasons Since they didn't give any reasons it's just retribution for his attacks Their reasons are pretty solid. He linked a bunch of comments and each time caused lots of downvote brigades. It happened over and over again, and he didn't explicitly tell them to do anything, but it seems clear he did it intending them to do it, and knowing they would do it. Other people do it, but none to the same extent, and more importantly, none that cause the same kinds of behavior. He was asked not to do it, and refused. Now you might not agree with those reasons, and think it's weird, but let's say Louis CK was petty enough to read the comments of all his posts in a certain subreddit, and then post to twitter certain flamewars between his fans and people who hate him, such that all of his posts ended up being giant shitshows where his fans mass upvote/downvote stuff, and that Louis CK did this over and over and over again, then that subreddit's moderators would probably have to take action too. RL is only "singled out" because he's the only person to have done this, apparently. It's kind of a weird arbitrary line, I agree, but life and law are full of weird arbitrary lines. Most of the time people can link to reddit discussions and be fine. Sometimes people abuse the system, and then they get punished for it, and then they'll point to unpunished similar behavior, and you have no perfect way to distinguish the two situations sometimes except for the "I know it when I see it" rule. I'm just not that troubled by that. It happens all the time in the justice system. That's the point of case law. You don't know where exactly the line should be drawn, but you do know that this particular case is over the line. I agree these aren't "users making a habit of trying to work around this ban", but aren't there other reasons to delete posts? These seem to be justifiably deleted under the no-relation-to-lol rule. One of those posts is even pro-moderators and got deleted. Now I'm the one confused. Are we discussing RL's ban by Reddit as a whole, or by the leagueoflegends subreddit? I'm pretty sure Reddit as a whole didn't ban RL, as evidenced by RiotFreeLoL. As for the threatening to release moderator personal information, that surely does not help matters. Do you all think that that's a more justifiable reason to ban his content, or less justifiable? Or does it just meld together into a totality-of-the-circumstances thing? I believe the content ban of RL on /r/lol is sanctioned by reddit admins. You can see several interaction of him and RL on RL's video. | ||
| ||
The PiG Daily
Best Games of SC
Rogue vs TriGGeR
Maru vs MaxPax
Rogue vs herO
Clem vs herO
Rogue vs Maru
PiGStarcraft536
[ Submit Event ] |
|
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Other Games |
|
CranKy Ducklings
WardiTV Team League
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
IPSL
Hawk vs TBD
StRyKeR vs TBD
BSL
n0maD vs perroflaco
TerrOr vs ZZZero
MadiNho vs WolFix
DragOn vs LancerX
Sparkling Tuna Cup
WardiTV Team League
OSC
BSL
Sterling vs Azhi_Dahaki
Napoleon vs Mazur
Jimin vs Nesh
spx vs Strudel
IPSL
Artosis vs TBD
Napoleon vs TBD
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
