RowanE comments on Could auto-generated troll scores reduce Twitter and Facebook harassments? - Less Wrong

0 Post author: Stefan_Schubert 30 April 2015 02:05PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (42)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: RowanE 02 May 2015 03:00:03PM 4 points [-]

Most of the top comments are "this is a terrible idea and here are the reasons we should never do it", and his comment is "we can do it sooner than you think, here's how". To people concerned about censorship and creation of echo-chambers, the trollface image is adding insult to injury for those harmed by the filter as well as being an easy-to-imagine detail so people are less detached and more emotional in responding to it.

Also personally, while I grudgingly accept that people currently use "troll" to simply mean "mean person on the internet" without regard to the more specific meaning that "troll" used to have, I'm pretty sure the trollface is specific to trolling in the latter sense, while it's only the former that could plausibly be detected by a filter, and the incorrect usage of the meme aggravates me no end.

Comment author: Jiro 02 May 2015 03:31:00PM *  2 points [-]

Discussing the details of how to do bad things, and doing so for its own sake rather than as a step towards showing something else, is in the real world Bayseian evidence that you support those bad things. Announcing "I personally have started implementing a step needed for one of those bad things" is even worse.

Comment author: Stefan_Schubert 02 May 2015 06:33:17PM -2 points [-]

Most of the top comments are "this is a terrible idea and here are the reasons we should never do it", and his comment is "we can do it sooner than you think, here's how".

I get that. But in my book you don't downvote a comment simply because you don't agree with it. You downvote a comment because it is poorly argued, makes no sense, or something like that. Clearly, that doesn't apply to this comment.

Comment author: RowanE 02 May 2015 10:43:50PM 2 points [-]

Well, the disagreement is on the level of the latter taking completely for granted the point that the former is disagreeing with (i.e. that the 'troll filter' is desirable), which could be "poorly argued" from some perspectives, or otherwise seems to fall under the "or something like that" umbrella.

Comment author: Lumifer 02 May 2015 10:44:47PM 1 point [-]

But in my book you don't downvote a comment simply because you don't agree with it.

Does it surprise you that many people here have books that are different from yours?

Comment author: Username 03 May 2015 05:12:50PM 1 point [-]

This seems like a great way to build echo chambers. "Oh, he dares to hold a different view than mine? Downvote!"

Comment author: Lumifer 03 May 2015 05:44:44PM 2 points [-]

Not a great way, but a small step towards, yes :-)

But the LW-in-reality is some distance away from the LW-as-it-should-be. In practice I see downvotes on the basis of disagreement all the time. This is what is (descriptive) regardless of what people would like to be (normative).