Community Interaction and Conflict on the Web · HackerPapers discussions

Community Interaction and Conflict on the Web — mentioned by anigbrowl

Fri, 14 Feb 2025 23:02:51 GMT

I really think people can distinguish between a formal accusation and snark. Now, I agree that in febrile political environments it's better not to rely on sarcasm and satire for communication because it imposes extra cognitive overhead and is subject to misinterpretation, but at the same time 'found the [negative stereotype]' is such a common joke format in American popular culture that it would be foolish to take it literally. It's like objecting to a 'knock knock' joke by complaining that the person is lying about being on the other side of a door. And putting trolls and their critics on…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Community Interaction and Conflict on the Web — mentioned by anigbrowl

Wed, 04 Oct 2023 06:51:58 GMT

Because social media spaces are contestable territory. https://arxiv.org/abs/1803.03697

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Community Interaction and Conflict on the Web — mentioned by anigbrowl

Wed, 16 Aug 2023 02:37:10 GMT

That doesn't work, because they just escalate or get other people to act out on their behalf. And really, why should we construct society around the behaviors the worst people? There is some evidence for the proposition that rude responses to provocations is in fact the most effective moderations strategy. https://arxiv.org/abs/1803.03697

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Community Interaction and Conflict on the Web — mentioned by anigbrowl

Fri, 21 Jul 2023 19:22:50 GMT

Community Interaction and Conflict on the Web: https://arxiv.org/abs/1803.03697 Humans display a reduced set of consistent behavioral phenotypes in dyadic games: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.1600451 Simple mathematical models with very complicated dynamics: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/237005499_Simple_Ma...

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Community Interaction and Conflict on the Web — mentioned by anigbrowl

Thu, 15 Jun 2023 18:35:41 GMT

It does, and that's another opportunity to repost this evergreen paper describing how these issues manifest on Reddit. https://arxiv.org/abs/1803.03697

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Community Interaction and Conflict on the Web — mentioned by anigbrowl

Thu, 13 Apr 2023 21:39:13 GMT

That's because the 4chan/pol/ crowd are actively pushing into Twitter; for all practical purposes it's the biggest chan raid of all time, except that it's largely at the invitation of Twitter's owner. Once again linking this excellent paper on the dynamics of intergroup aggression in virtual spaces: https://arxiv.org/abs/1803.03697

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Community Interaction and Conflict on the Web — mentioned by anigbrowl

Wed, 22 Feb 2023 17:37:49 GMT

Yeah, something like that. Also that if you serially abuse a service, you lose your privacy protections, for example your IP gets exposed/ I'm also a big fan of community-driven responses, but these require platform owners to give up some control in favor of being more custodians than barons. Since many of them are selling every bit of data on their users that's not likely to happen under current arrangements. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1803.03697.pdf

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Community Interaction and Conflict on the Web — mentioned by anigbrowl

Mon, 16 Jan 2023 22:26:43 GMT

Community Interaction and Conflict on the Web https://arxiv.org/pdf/1803.03697.pdf

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Community Interaction and Conflict on the Web — mentioned by anigbrowl

Thu, 03 Nov 2022 21:06:55 GMT

Reposting this paper yet again, to rub in the point that social media platforms play host to communities and communities are often very good at detecting interlopers and saboteurs and pushing them back out. And it turns out the most effective approach is to let people give bad actors a hard time. Moderation policies that require everyone to adhere to high standards of politeness in all circumstances are trying to reproduce the dynamics of kindergartens, and are not effective because the moderators are easily gamed. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1803.03697.pdf Also, if you're running or working for a…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Community Interaction and Conflict on the Web — mentioned by anigbrowl

Sat, 22 Oct 2022 01:45:18 GMT

Coherent communities are surprisingly good at detecting malicious interlopers and simply giving them a hard time is a surprisingly effective tactic. This paper from the Stanford social media lab showcases some nice research on the dynamics of competitive forum raiding on Reddit that are fairly generalizable to other contexts. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1803.03697.pdf

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Community Interaction and Conflict on the Web — HN submission

Fri, 02 Sep 2022 19:41:35 GMT

Community Interaction and Conflict on the Web (2018)

1 point; 0 discussion replies on HN. Paper and source history. A submission is not an endorsement.

Community Interaction and Conflict on the Web — mentioned by anigbrowl

Thu, 25 Aug 2022 21:00:40 GMT

This is a long-running problem for HN, where civility is valued above integrity, incentivizing drive-by trolling because instigators are given the benefit of the doubt. There's evidence that uncivil responses to abusive incursions are better for the long-term health of a community. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1803.03697.pdf

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Community Interaction and Conflict on the Web — HN submission

Tue, 08 Feb 2022 15:19:47 GMT

Community Interaction and Conflict on the Web (2018)

2 points; 0 discussion replies on HN. Paper and source history. A submission is not an endorsement.