Do you like social media?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3

 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
ringfinger
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 18893

PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 6:46 pm    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
And would the moderator not essentially be a person subject to insultating their pet beliefs and/or being influenced by outside factors?


Well, we have an element of that even with the moderation on this board. Do we conclude that moderation is therefore a futility?

Anyway, in the future social media world that I foresee, the marketplace will deal with these sorts of problems. If the moderation pushes a particular social agenda, it will limit the size of the community. Market forces will reward more limited moderation as long as security is maintained.


Well, I think there is a difference between moderating "social media" versus moderating singular components under it.

Just like free speech.

I have no issues if someone wants to forbid guests from using curse words in their home. But a totally different story if you try to do it at the broader level.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ContagiousInspiration
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 07 May 2014
Posts: 3348

PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 7:12 pm    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
And would the moderator not essentially be a person subject to insultating their pet beliefs and/or being influenced by outside factors?


Well, we have an element of that even with the moderation on this board. Do we conclude that moderation is therefore a futility?

Anyway, in the future social media world that I foresee, the marketplace will deal with these sorts of problems. If the moderation pushes a particular social agenda, it will limit the size of the community. Market forces will reward more limited moderation as long as security is maintained.


Well, I think there is a difference between moderating "social media" versus moderating singular components under it.

Just like free speech.

I have no issues if someone wants to forbid guests from using curse words in their home. But a totally different story if you try to do it at the broader level.


What if the Government created a law against intentional lying?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 39661
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 7:21 pm    Post subject:

The concept of "Free Speech" is one ion the most misunderstood ones. Free speech protections are about preventing the government from using its powers to prevent reasonable free expression . It has nothing to do with social media, which is not run by the government. There's no free speech protections that say social media platforms can't moderate their users and put parameters on what they will allow.
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
Heís something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built thatís all for show goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
jodeke
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 41762
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered intelligent.

PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 7:25 pm    Post subject:

LarryCoon wrote:
jodeke wrote:
OK. I'll take that we as you. I don't see anyone else going there. With that said, IA about NK. In America we're regulated by the constitution. 1st amendment. Good or bad is a matter of opinion.


First amendment doesn't apply here. We're under no obligation to provide you a platform to say anything, and we're not (nor are we in a position to) deny your right of free speech in general.


Was making the comparison to NK statement
Quote:
Which opinions are "valid" or not. This is what they do in North Korea, not here in the US of A

_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.

Your prayers are always answered. Sometimes the answer is NO.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 18893

PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 7:40 pm    Post subject:

DaMuleRules wrote:
The concept of "Free Speech" is one ion the most misunderstood ones. Free speech protections are about preventing the government from using its powers to prevent reasonable free expression . It has nothing to do with social media, which is not run by the government. There's no free speech protections that say social media platforms can't moderate their users and put parameters on what they will allow.


Nice. But I don't think anyone is disputing that.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 18893

PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 7:42 pm    Post subject:

ContagiousInspiration wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
And would the moderator not essentially be a person subject to insultating their pet beliefs and/or being influenced by outside factors?


Well, we have an element of that even with the moderation on this board. Do we conclude that moderation is therefore a futility?

Anyway, in the future social media world that I foresee, the marketplace will deal with these sorts of problems. If the moderation pushes a particular social agenda, it will limit the size of the community. Market forces will reward more limited moderation as long as security is maintained.


Well, I think there is a difference between moderating "social media" versus moderating singular components under it.

Just like free speech.

I have no issues if someone wants to forbid guests from using curse words in their home. But a totally different story if you try to do it at the broader level.


What if the Government created a law against intentional lying?


Well, there are some laws like that at least as it pertains to advertising and deceptive practices.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ContagiousInspiration
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 07 May 2014
Posts: 3348

PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 7:56 pm    Post subject:

Increased Hours Online Correlate With An Uptick In Teen Depression, Suicidal Thoughts
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 39661
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 8:17 pm    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
The concept of "Free Speech" is one ion the most misunderstood ones. Free speech protections are about preventing the government from using its powers to prevent reasonable free expression . It has nothing to do with social media, which is not run by the government. There's no free speech protections that say social media platforms can't moderate their users and put parameters on what they will allow.


Nice. But I don't think anyone is disputing that.


Other than you? No.
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
Heís something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built thatís all for show goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 19226

PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 9:21 pm    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
Well, I think there is a difference between moderating "social media" versus moderating singular components under it.

Just like free speech.

I have no issues if someone wants to forbid guests from using curse words in their home. But a totally different story if you try to do it at the broader level.


I'm talking about voluntary moderation. I foresee a future in which people will pay a small fee to join a moderated social media environment with specified rules. We aren't there yet. It may take five years, or twenty years. But I think it will happen.

I don't think that social media can be effectively regulated from the outside (namely by the government). But I do think that a large portion of social media users, perhaps a majority, will tire of the chaos and antisocial behavior in unmoderated social media. The underlying problem is inherent in the internet culture: the anonymity of the internet facilitates and perhaps even encourages antisocial and sociopathic behavior. People will say and do things on the internet that they would never say or do to your face.

Over the past twenty years or so, I've seen the same problems pop up in MMOs (starting with EverQuest and WoW), message boards (I'm a survivor of the old AOL boards), and now social media outlets like Facebook. The solution will not come from the outside. It will come from people demanding (and being willing to pay for) the internet equivalent of the local police department or the nightclub bouncer.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 18893

PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 9:24 pm    Post subject:

DaMuleRules wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
The concept of "Free Speech" is one ion the most misunderstood ones. Free speech protections are about preventing the government from using its powers to prevent reasonable free expression . It has nothing to do with social media, which is not run by the government. There's no free speech protections that say social media platforms can't moderate their users and put parameters on what they will allow.


Nice. But I don't think anyone is disputing that.


Other than you? No.


If you would have actually read my response, you would have seen I was already one step ahead of you on that front. Seems like you saw "free speech" and immediately assumed it was a great chance for one of your teachable moments.

But I'll repeat it again for your benefit.

There would be a distinction between a blanket moderation on all social media versus moderation at the individual platform level by the platform owner. I would oppose the former and support the right to do the latter.

In short, like with free speech, we don't want moderation of social media on the global level (i.e. what you can say, what interests you want to congregate on) but at the local or individual level, it should be up to the platform owner to decide to impose whatever restrictions they like whether I agree with them or not.

Simplifying it further, just in case, we shouldn't want moderation of the Internet (again with some basic guidelines as with free speech), but moderation of a message board or a social platform site on the Internet? Go ahead.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 18893

PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 9:32 pm    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
Well, I think there is a difference between moderating "social media" versus moderating singular components under it.

Just like free speech.

I have no issues if someone wants to forbid guests from using curse words in their home. But a totally different story if you try to do it at the broader level.


I'm talking about voluntary moderation. I foresee a future in which people will pay a small fee to join a moderated social media environment with specified rules. We aren't there yet. It may take five years, or twenty years. But I think it will happen.

I don't think that social media can be effectively regulated from the outside (namely by the government). But I do think that a large portion of social media users, perhaps a majority, will tire of the chaos and antisocial behavior in unmoderated social media. The underlying problem is inherent in the internet culture: the anonymity of the internet facilitates and perhaps even encourages antisocial and sociopathic behavior. People will say and do things on the internet that they would never say or do to your face.

Over the past twenty years or so, I've seen the same problems pop up in MMOs (starting with EverQuest and WoW), message boards (I'm a survivor of the old AOL boards), and now social media outlets like Facebook. The solution will not come from the outside. It will come from people demanding (and being willing to pay for) the internet equivalent of the local police department or the nightclub bouncer.


LG is basically what you're referring to. And we've always had that. Just in the old days they were called fan clubs. And the fees are paid for by advertisers. No?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 18893

PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 9:33 pm    Post subject:

ContagiousInspiration wrote:
Increased Hours Online Correlate With An Uptick In Teen Depression, Suicidal Thoughts


So they are online because they are depressed, perhaps?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
tox
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 16 Nov 2015
Posts: 11545

PostPosted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 1:35 am    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
ContagiousInspiration wrote:
Increased Hours Online Correlate With An Uptick In Teen Depression, Suicidal Thoughts


So they are online because they are depressed, perhaps?

I think there's research that concludes something causative when it comes to Facebook and depression, but not necessarily online in general. Fwiw
_________________
https://j.gifs.com/Rnqnbk.gif
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 18893

PostPosted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 6:33 am    Post subject:

tox wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
ContagiousInspiration wrote:
Increased Hours Online Correlate With An Uptick In Teen Depression, Suicidal Thoughts


So they are online because they are depressed, perhaps?

I think there's research that concludes something causative when it comes to Facebook and depression, but not necessarily online in general. Fwiw


I remember that report, but there have been other reports since then, that found no such thing.

There's no doubt a relationship here, I'm just not sure there is that singular smoking gun that many seem to want to look for.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
jodeke
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 41762
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered intelligent.

PostPosted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 9:53 am    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
Well, I think there is a difference between moderating "social media" versus moderating singular components under it.

Just like free speech.

I have no issues if someone wants to forbid guests from using curse words in their home. But a totally different story if you try to do it at the broader level.


I'm talking about voluntary moderation. I foresee a future in which people will pay a small fee to join a moderated social media environment with specified rules. We aren't there yet. It may take five years, or twenty years. But I think it will happen.

I don't think that social media can be effectively regulated from the outside (namely by the government). But I do think that a large portion of social media users, perhaps a majority, will tire of the chaos and antisocial behavior in unmoderated social media. The underlying problem is inherent in the internet culture: the anonymity of the internet facilitates and perhaps even encourages antisocial and sociopathic behavior. People will say and do things on the internet that they would never say or do to your face.

Over the past twenty years or so, I've seen the same problems pop up in MMOs (starting with EverQuest and WoW), message boards (I'm a survivor of the old AOL boards), and now social media outlets like Facebook. The solution will not come from the outside. It will come from people demanding (and being willing to pay for) the internet equivalent of the local police department or the nightclub bouncer.


I'm also a survivor. Thank you for the rescue.

I'm of a mind PPV isn't really necessary, good mods should get it done. I liken mods to having a job. I don't know if there's a salary involved but for the sake of argument, lets say there is.

I assume LG has a owner. That being the case he/she has a responsibility to members. Mods should be chosen with care. For lack of a better term, they should be carefully vetted. There are posters in this forum that show promise. There are also some who I don't think are suited for the responsibility. I've seen a couple come and go.

A good moderator is like a good referee, they're there, doing their job but for a great part go unnoticed. No Joey Crawford's. They don't let their position of power seep into their decisions. They step in, keep the fight clean then retreat to a neutral corner.

LG mods for the most part do a excellent job. There's a show of favoritism to some posters, a lot of tolerance for others, it balances. Consider human nature. I agree the solution lies within.

Instead of paying, frequent sites that fit your particular tastes. I don't post on Facebook or Twitter, I lurk. They seem to be sites most popular. I guess because of the lack of or lax monitors.

Advertisers will factor in. If a site increases their bottom line they'll advertise on that site. If one doesn't, they wont.

One last point. LG please, please, please don't give those gaudy, self promoting, space taking inserts mod privileges to all.
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.

Your prayers are always answered. Sometimes the answer is NO.


Last edited by jodeke on Wed Nov 15, 2017 6:40 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 19226

PostPosted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 11:51 am    Post subject:

I foresee a future social media platform of such scale that paid moderators would be required. Imagine a moderated version of Facebook. Right now, people would not pay for it. I think that will change as time goes by.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ContagiousInspiration
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 07 May 2014
Posts: 3348

PostPosted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 11:53 am    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
tox wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
ContagiousInspiration wrote:
Increased Hours Online Correlate With An Uptick In Teen Depression, Suicidal Thoughts


So they are online because they are depressed, perhaps?

I think there's research that concludes something causative when it comes to Facebook and depression, but not necessarily online in general. Fwiw


I remember that report, but there have been other reports since then, that found no such thing.

There's no doubt a relationship here, I'm just not sure there is that singular smoking gun that many seem to want to look for.


I am of the opinion it has to do with lack of exercise and real socializing
And possibly a lack of Vitamin D
Maybe we can create monitors that mimic some of the suns beneficial rays
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 18893

PostPosted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:55 pm    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
I foresee a future social media platform of such scale that paid moderators would be required. Imagine a moderated version of Facebook. Right now, people would not pay for it. I think that will change as time goes by.


Facebook is already moderated.

They filter out content from your news feed and ban things like hate speech, etc.

Facebook isn't unmoderated. What do you mean by moderated?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 19226

PostPosted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 1:02 pm    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
I foresee a future social media platform of such scale that paid moderators would be required. Imagine a moderated version of Facebook. Right now, people would not pay for it. I think that will change as time goes by.


Facebook is already moderated.

They filter out content from your news feed and ban things like hate speech, etc.

Facebook isn't unmoderated. What do you mean by moderated?


Pass.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LakersRGolden
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 13 Jan 2002
Posts: 6289
Location: Lake Forest

PostPosted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 1:03 pm    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
I foresee a future social media platform of such scale that paid moderators would be required. Imagine a moderated version of Facebook. Right now, people would not pay for it. I think that will change as time goes by.


Not a fan of isolated anonymous groups sealing themselves off engaged in group think. If you think some of the reddit forums are bad, what would they germinate behind a pay wall where counter arguments are moderated away?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 18893

PostPosted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 1:27 pm    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
I foresee a future social media platform of such scale that paid moderators would be required. Imagine a moderated version of Facebook. Right now, people would not pay for it. I think that will change as time goes by.


Facebook is already moderated.

They filter out content from your news feed and ban things like hate speech, etc.

Facebook isn't unmoderated. What do you mean by moderated?


Pass.


Clearly there is a misunderstanding of Facebook here. They already try to only show you what they think you ought to want to consume.

At no charge.

So i'm not sure what it is i would pay for when in FB, they are already filtering stuff out and if other crap is still coming through I can just moderate it myself. All at the expense of advertisers.

And "of such scale"? Facebook is already at critical mass essentially. Can't get much bigger.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 19226

PostPosted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 1:54 pm    Post subject:

LakersRGolden wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
I foresee a future social media platform of such scale that paid moderators would be required. Imagine a moderated version of Facebook. Right now, people would not pay for it. I think that will change as time goes by.


Not a fan of isolated anonymous groups sealing themselves off engaged in group think. If you think some of the reddit forums are bad, what would they germinate behind a pay wall where counter arguments are moderated away?


The marketplace will deal with that, given time. If people want to live in a political bubble, they can do that now. But social media is about a lot more than politics. I understand why everyone keeps fixating on politics, but for the average person social media is not about politics.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
maxstone
Rookie
Rookie


Joined: 20 Nov 2017
Posts: 2

PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 1:10 am    Post subject:

well, I can't say I hate it, I use it a lot for work, but I don't like kids' addiction to social media.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
Page 3 of 3
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2010 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB