Rant: Stacker News is full of garbage. Let's fix that (?) \ stacker news ~Design

pull down to refresh

Rant: Stacker News is full of garbage. Let's fix that (?)

654 sats \ 41 comments \ @MattInTech 19 Feb Design

Genuine question: am I the only one noticing that SN is getting filled with garbage posts or useless links that people post hoping for a few zaps? This also happens within posts: comments that are supposed to be funny/provocative get a lot more attention and zaps than actually helpful ones. I get the idea of wearing a cowboy hat and entering a lawless territory, but this is a dangerous path for a growing community. The risk of turning into a toxic one is pretty high imo, there should be some form of content moderation or QC in posts that doesn't harm free speech and idea exchange. Would this be something worth investigating? If yes, how? I have no experience in dealing with online communities, but would be willing to contribute in some way, if people think this is a good idea.

view all related items

900 sats \ 5 replies \ @elvismercury 19 Feb

My experience is that it's less toxic than it used to be, in terms of general norms and behavior; and that territories have helped with that, since SN seems less appealing to brainless maxi types who just want somewhere to vomit the creed they read on Twitter into each other's mouths. Real people talking about their lives seems to be a countervailing force against extremist stupidity -- that's what I've observed in real time since July.

Whatever badness is leftover is a function of humans at scale. If you don't like it, model something better. It works.

248 sats \ 3 replies \ @carlosfandango 19 Feb

Generally agree although I’m not sure it is territory related. I think SN has become less toxic as a result of how badly some Stackers were treated when they called people out. I think a few of the maxi-guardians became jaded and now either keep quiet or have slipped away. The conversations seem more pleasant and calm…. but it has come at a cost.

104 sats \ 1 reply \ @ek 19 Feb

good point! there are a lot of conflicting interests here.

the toxic stuff might have moved to SN underground

33 sats \ 0 replies \ @carlosfandango 19 Feb

The -1 layer protocol built beneath Bitcoin.

The first rule of Maxi Club is you do not talk about Maxi Club…

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @elvismercury 19 Feb

What do you think the cost has been?

10 sats \ 0 replies \ @grayruby 19 Feb

Hey, don't trash my kind. Brainless maxis like me love SN too

307 sats \ 2 replies \ @k00b 19 Feb freebie

How much are you zapping Matt? If not very often, how do expect SN to look the way you want it?

299 sats \ 1 reply \ @k00b 19 Feb

How often are you posting Matt? If not very often, how do expect SN to look the way you want it?

299 sats \ 0 replies \ @k00b 19 Feb

How often are you commenting Matt? If not very often, how do expect SN to look the way you want it?

363 sats \ 0 replies \ @Fabs 19 Feb

Have a look over at R/Bitcoin, you'll appreciate SN a mighty-fine deal more at an instant!

549 sats \ 0 replies \ @siggy47 19 Feb

I have been here for almost two years. There have always been crappy clickbait posts. You can down zap them. IMO there is less toxicity here than in most online communities. Free speech preserving content moderation is an oxymoron. I think we have the tools to combat the spam now. Also, cowboy hats aren't really related to lawless territories.

317 sats \ 0 replies \ @Coyote_Cosmico 19 Feb

I don't find SN toxic, but the low effort link-only posts diminish the experience for me.

I like to browse the "new" tab to find quality content and help bring it to the surface, but often the entire page there is just links with no comment at all.

I really wish we could filter those out. There is a filter for link vs discussion, but I don't want to hide all link posts, just ones with zero commentary.

I suppose territory mods could steer things in a more positive direction by setting rules that if you're posting a link, at least write a sentence or two about why it's worthy of attention.

192 sats \ 1 reply \ @Design_r 19 Feb

You rise a pretty fair point and I appreciate you sharing your thought and feelings in the ~Design territory. @MattInTech did you post it here to plan a possible solution? if yes you are in the right place... Let's brainstorm!

Products improve with honest feedback, and I consider this a valid one for @SN team. You are not the only one noticing the change. I see it as a natural consequence of the new wave of newbies signing up from outer galaxies! I'd be interested to know here the inflow is coming from...

Anyway, the second thought you triggered with this post is about our responsibility to keep this space clean and welcoming. All that spam posts and comments should be ignored, but as bitcoiners I believe we are pretty well experienced filtering the signal. We have the tools to downzap, soon we'll be able to unzap and in moderated territories the territory owners (and hopefully future moderators or collaborators) ca outlaw contents that will be not visible when wild west mode is deactivated (in your setting page).

Let's just use this tools as community, I've removed the moderation from this territory because I trust the community, and I know (ad hope) the most zapped cotenst will be o the top of the top (page). If I do not agree, I downzap (but not outlaw any more, as I believe everyone has the right to write freely and express their ideas.

My current strategy is to:

ignore noise
if it's really loud noise, downzap accordingly
respond to meaningful posts, especially where I know I can constructively contribute
longer my response, more appreciation and sats that post or comment gets.

But what'else we can do to improve SN and help these newbies understand here things work differently?

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @joda 19 Feb

I think you pretty much address everything with this post.

I think it's up to some of the more experienced members to point out these tools and strategies to noobs.

31 sats \ 0 replies \ @justanumber 19 Feb

I know the kind of posts you're talking and I get you. It floods the place with worthless content. I called someone out this morning who just wrote one sentence in the subject header and literally nothing else. I've started downzapping and muting users that post pointless content that is clearly just fishing for a few sats, otherwise I can't see anything as there's too much "noise".

42 sats \ 14 replies \ @fm 19 Feb

Before territories it used to be less spam and more closeknit

122 sats \ 9 replies \ @siggy47 19 Feb

You can mute the territories you don't like.

21 sats \ 8 replies \ @fm 19 Feb

Im aware, But the fact there is now different territories definitely invites to lot more spam and less interaction.

1144 sats \ 7 replies \ @siggy47 19 Feb

You're probably right, but you can mute territories you don't like. That's what I do, and it's effective. If you want to mimic SN from the "old days", mute everything but the bitcoin territory.

127 sats \ 6 replies \ @k00b 19 Feb

Rather than making territories opt-out (ie mute) perhaps we should make them opt-in (ie join) and by default it's just ~bitcoin.

1143 sats \ 3 replies \ @siggy47 19 Feb

The only problem with that is that new stackers who may have been attracted to SN for a specific territory might get confused when they first log in.

1070 sats \ 0 replies \ @supratic 21 Feb

Maybe a different landing page could help?

https://imgprxy.stacker.news/e-Cmd_G_ljn1IRMri5FtXADjZbogp5n-P5HJmunHZqw/rs:fit:2560:1440/aHR0cHM6Ly9pbWFnZS5ub3N0ci5idWlsZC8yZWZiMTNlZGE3ZjM0OWMzNWQ2OWUyOTM3ZjExY2Q3ZGIzNjQyOGU1OWM4NGMyNmYyOGM4ZjYxM2E5MTE2NDYxLnBuZw

308 sats \ 1 reply \ @supertestnet 19 Feb freebie

You could probably partially solve that with a ref link that uses a cookie to automatically-and-semi-permanently opt into its creators territory if you click it

Wouldn't work if they come back on a different device without logging in or clicking the link, expecting to see that territory again because "it was there last time"

Maybe the expectation could be assisted by explicitly asking them: "do you want to see this territory next time you visit?" If they click yes, prompt them to log in or create an account

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Design_r 19 Feb

The magic of tech! That's exactly how it could work

reply on another page

10 sats \ 0 replies \ @Design_r 19 Feb

This is a great idea and it will force newbies to discover the contents they are looking for!

In the other side, I like the fact that everyone here is forced to filter the noise to get the signal is looking for.. it requires more effort that just opt-in

42 sats \ 0 replies \ @fm 19 Feb

im not sure one or other is better. simply because of the fact the posts are lot more disperse, the interaction changed. Not saying this is bad.. Just changed to a lesser closeknit community

0 sats \ 3 replies \ @MattInTech OP 19 Feb

Totally agree. I see the point of having specific territories in place, but there should be some form of content moderation. I don't know, in its current state it's very difficult to like this platform...

243 sats \ 2 replies \ @ek 19 Feb freebie

but there should be some form of content moderation

Zaps, downzaps, personal user + territory mutes and your settings are the content moderation.

screenshot from user settings:

https://m.stacker.news/16730

We also use a Web of Trust to rank content in a personalized way. See FAQ: How Does The Stacker News Web of Trust Work?

Maybe you can tell us how you would like content moderation to work? Moderators? Territory owners can enable moderation and outlaw content with a single click.¹

So I am not sure what you are asking for that we don't already have in some form.

If you want to see outlawed content, you can enable wild west mode in your settings. ↩

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @arrivederci 20 Feb

Maybe you can tell us how you would like content moderation to work?

Here's what I would suggest for content moderation of SN 'territories'.

Territories are just namespaces. I personally don't think anyone should own a namespace (this was the big problem on reddit with the equivalent subreddits). Instead, I would suggest that different teams (or even just an individual) can act as moderation filters on a territory. They would set out their moderation philosophy somewhere. Then stackers could subscribe to the moderation team of their choosing and pay a subscription fee to that moderation team. That would ensure competition between moderation teams as to who provides 'the best' moderation. Of course, what 'the best' moderation is is subjective to different stackers. Some would prefer tight moderation and removal (from visibility, not complete removal) of lots of low effort posts. Some would prefer more permissive moderation. Some would prefer moderation that hews more closely to their ideological positions, etc. etc. (And a certain percentage of subscriptions from stackers to moderation teams would flow to Stacker News itself.)

I would envision starting out there would be just a single moderation team per territory. But I would expect that one or two alternative teams would soon come into place. However the original moderation team (who may have also created the territory), would have first mover advantage and would probably keep the majority of stackers unless they start making moderation decisions that stackers don't like.

Importantly stackers would still have the option of viewing a territory completely unmoderated / unfiltered. And of viewing the territory through the filter of an alternative moderation team for a short period of time, to see the territory through that different filter (to help them decide whether they want to switch).

Not sure I've explained this well so here's an attempt at a dot point tl;dr :

no-one owns a territory namespace (although there may still be a price paid to create one)
instead there can be different moderation teams for any territory, that filter what stackers who are subscribed to their moderation see when they view the territory
subscription fees flow to moderation teams but with a certain percentage going to SN itself
stackers still have the option of viewing a territory completely unfiltered (unmoderated) by any moderation team, and not having to pay a subscription cost

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Design_r 21 Feb

I do agree, it should be not just one territory owner, it's a lot of work to curate a territory and SN yet does not offer enough tools to support this solo mission. Anyhow, I decided to sign up for the challenge and support this great corner of the internet to flourish. I really look forward to more collaboration tools and especially the ability to have more than one owner per territory: a territory team!

I do not see moderation competition as a constructive way to moderate here, especially if there are economical rewards behind. I like the idea to have mod teams, that will help a lot ad for this specific reason I'd use collaboration instead of competitiveness.

Something like this is already happening, on ~meta. You'll see some time there, territory owner sharing their experiences in a fully transparent way, including tips and tricks other terrowners can adopt

21 sats \ 0 replies \ @tomlaies 19 Feb

I agree but it's also that the posts that I see as low quality engagement bait are also highly upvoted in sats.

E.g. "discussion" posts that are really just link posts with one comment sentence and an oversimplified populist/clickbait headline.

It seems like people just simply like the low quality high quantity posts in terms of sats. It might be less bad in terms of number of stackers but I'm not sure more weighting towards that would actually be more than a small improvement.

26 sats \ 0 replies \ @Natalia 19 Feb freebie

my home page is pretty nice and clean atm, and my hack is to mute all the accounts & territories that don't offer any value.

16 sats \ 0 replies \ @kr 19 Feb freebie

learning to effectively zap and downzap will help shape the things you (and other stackers) see on their feeds

21 sats \ 0 replies \ @gd 19 Feb

This is really not my experience of SN at all. I'm yet to be totally convinced about territories (and that segmentation of content/opportunity for nonsense), but I would say I am engaged by good content on the vast majority of my visits.

I've certainly had my negative encounters on SN, but I expect (and want) that from any meaningful community.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @UCantDoThatDotRugged 20 Feb

40% yeah totally agree, for just sharing a link with a bot and quick click noise. mostly a tech solution that includes user side filters / sorting options issue IMO 25% i like a good mix of perspectives and at the same time some perspectives are annoying. 20 % agree mostly, but freedom is messy. there will always be bad actors, opportunists, and scammers, the incentives here actually minimize them. 15% look at the hall monitor, why don't you zap what you want to see and let others do the same

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @OT 19 Feb

If you stay in "hot" most of the stuff has been curated by stackers digging through the recent.

Its still pretty small. Enjoy it before it gets too big!

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Bell_curve 19 Feb

Which post bothered you?

Which comment offended you?

0 sats \ 2 replies \ @Roll 19 Feb freebie

Would it be possible to implement negative zap for inapropriate: links, comments, subjects, questions in order to downgrade cowboyhat or to put the post as the old post ?

And to avoid have abusive persons that are doing negative zap, this negative zap will be really effective is severals person do it (min of 3 for example)

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @PanningForSats 19 Feb freebie

deleted by author

Footnotes