Comment by toomuchtodo
6 days ago
It’s not a problem, you are owned nothing by participating in an online forum. Your participation is a privilege, not a right. You are free to participate elsewhere.
HN moderates mostly transparently, which they do not have to do at all. That demonstrates respect for their participants, or ideals, your pick.
you are owned nothing by participating in an online forum. Your participation is a privilege, not a right. You are free to participate elsewhere.
It's still cruel and dehumanizing behavior.
"if you don't like it then you can leave" (to paraphrase) evades my point.
My point (the problem) is that, when you do it this way, trust is right out the window. It looks like a forum but it really isn't. The conversation suffers from a taint.
Every publishing platform in existence is owned by someone with a God-like authority. What alternative is there? Can you give an example of a "real" forum?
All you have is trust. No evasion, those are the rules of the road as it stands in the jurisdiction of US web properties.
If your point is "I don't like the law of the jurisdiction and its outcomes," that is a feeling and a choice, but the fact remains. You can either change the law or change the feelings. Again, participation is a choice and optional, and the status quo is unlikely to change.
It's a shame how many platforms are moving away from transparent moderation. I get that there are strong incentives to do so - a user that knows they're banned will immediately try to find a way to circumvent the ban. Shadowbanning delays that reaction if not stopping it outright. But damn does the concept feel dystopian. Like you're being ignored through seemingly no fault of your own. Surely that can't be healthy. And yet the platform is better off because the person isn't trying to circumvent the ban. And don't even get me started on replacing human interaction with AI for shadowbanned users.
Why stop at shadowbanned users? A uniquely crafted custom world for every user!
[dead]