About 15 years ago, just before the last tech bubble burst, I was working for an ISP in London, doing sysadmin stuff on their forums (vbulletin), running their IRC server that was hooked up to DALnet, amongst all the other stuff as well expected of a sysadmin of that era. (Radius, LDAP, MySQL, blah blah blah). Before the company was bought by a large italian carrier, and before the bubble burst, we had somewhere around 600,000 customers (which was a big number back then!), with a vibrant community that was flourishing on the vbulletin forums, and with a fairly large number who liked to engage in IRC. The company spent no money on hardware at all for the entire time I was there. They were also running around and spending most of their time trying to figure out how much we were worth. At some point someone valued the company at over $800 per customer - $0.5Bn valuation, roughly. For a company that wasn't public, just a privately own company, a subsidiary of several other well known companies (hence being evasive who they are not that it probably matters anymore). Anyway, the management was throwing millions of dollars every month at marketing, sending out CDs to every man woman child and rabbit in the United Kingdom. They spent no money at all on hardware to support the influx of customers we were getting, even though we were hemorrhaging customers hand over fist because apparently it was an acceptable level of churn. All that mattered was, each user was worth $800 a year to someone, if only we can figure out how to extract that money from them. Of course it was bullshit. Just as we were being shopped around to be sold, the arse fell out of the market, and we ended up being sold to aforementioned italian carrier for ~$50Mn. (Can't remember the exact figures but the orders of magnitude should be about right) Sorry, I've rambled. My point, MBA types don't see a community. They see dollar signs. They see a user base to be converted into a revenue stream. They will not care if they lose 20%, or even maybe 50% of the community base as long as they can extract some magic amount of dollars from the remainder. According to https://www.reddit.com/about/, they handled 3,176,546 logged in users last month. Somewhere, someone has put a dollar figure on how much on average a reddit user is "worth", lets say $1000 a year, and they looking at the resultant $3Bn potential (bullshit) dollars, and wondering how, exactly, they can extract even just 10% of that. They will not give a flying fuck about whether or not the community will survive the experience.Control of Reddit is fully in the hands of the VCs now. You've got Ellen Pao (ex-Kleiner Perkins), Sam Altman (Y-Combinator) and Alexis Ohanian (Y-Combinator) in direct control of five dozen untenured, unempowered serfs. When Marissa Mayer bought Tumblr and said she wouldn't fuck with it, people believed her; when she burned Tumblr's community into a gif engine it was immediately obvious that Tumblr's monetization strategy was immune from its community.
I'm not yet convinced. The whole self moderation thing is so far incomplete and trivially circumvented with sockpuppets. The moderating tools seem to be merely encouraging a situation where there are (for example) people literally using hubski as a platform on which to incite racial hatred which those who've moderated out those folks won't realize the extent of, but they're nonetheless associated with in the eyes of potential community members who are then going to self select whether they want to be here.
What we have today isn't what we will have tomorrow. mk might want to jump in here, but I would expect that as problems arise there will be discussion and thought about how to deal with specific issues. For example, take a look at anti-spam solutions (I work at an anti-spam company). You can look at the entire user base and see how well they moderate, and whether they are accurate at moderating against obvious spam and other evils, or whether they just follow the herd. You can then weight those users higher, lets call them a canary. They are an early indicator that someone is a fuckwit. You could then use that data to generate a list of "low quality" submitters, that a user can opt into hiding posts from on their profile. "Hide low quality submitters" checkbox. The default "public" not-logged-in feed would show only "high quality submitters". Hubski could also generate a internal list of "high quality" members. These are members who consistently get badged for their content, and are rarely hidden or muted. A user could opt to sort "high quality members" to the top of threads. Again, the not-logged-in experience could have this enabled by default. This is just one idea that I came up with after reading your comment and thinking for a few minutes. mk etc are likely to be able to do better. I'm sure it has obvious flaws that haven't occurred to me yet. If you're not restrained by trying to make money and just care about the quality of the community, you can do things that you ordinarily wouldn't do.
This has to be the most succinct lambasting of Reddit culture I've seen so far. Nice job. I find it hard to go there, now that I know Hubski exists. I know that here at least you can have a reasoned debate, and the unreasonable can just be ignored.What does exist on Reddit is the abuse of speech as a "heckler's veto." Censorship by the mob. And the worst aspect of it is, management's laissez faire attitude toward it enables ripples across the internet.
>They will not give a flying fuck about whether or not the community will survive the experience. Well, of course not. Thing is, though, that's part of the huge reaction. I mean, it's also racist and misogynist, juvenile and intensely personal - but aside from all of that there is the sense of being disrespected. And if the past is any guide, all this butthurt will lead to the creation of wonderful things. Maybe one of those angry children will devise a way to automate management and venture capitalism.