public/pubic

(I’ll spare y’all from an illustration)

Remember, I did label this as “trivia.”

But again, this only works on social media sites with a small number of users. We may have had 300 or 400 total. Far less than that active. You just can’t scale the personal touch.

(Whenever something major happened, we’d post that we had an update about the “arrested teacher” in the comments.We then banned all discussion except in those threads. That way, people could get information & have their say, and victims could choose whether to look at/engage with the update.)

I’ve moderated PTA/PTO pages. We just try to be fair. We had a teacher get arrested & convicted for sexual abuse. We balanced the need to allow discussion & get information out with the need to ensure victims & victim families could use the page w/o always seeing the issue.

But that’s not scalable.

Lots of things can mitigate moderation errors. But given how many decisions need to be made quickly, nothing can eliminate the errors.

(And yes, I know you’ve basically said variations of that here about a million times. But it seems people still need to hear it.)

Rule Three: Rule One applies to Rule Two.

Maybe it comes down to what seems to be Rule One of content moderation: Content moderation will sometimes be unfair. One price for using social media is that at some point, you will be moderated unfairly.
Rule Two: Any attempt to get around a rule by being cute is itself a rule violation.

One of the harder ones, I’d think, is “Person X deserves the death penalty.” If you have a strict “no wish to physically harm” policy, people couldn’t argue for the death penalty for anyone. If you want to allow some pro-lDP arguments, you need a line people can’t cross. Similar situation for wars.

When I see an article I want to comment about, they’ve rarely posted it to their feed, & their link cards don’t show any photos. So, I usually screenshot the top of the article & just put a link in the text. I understand why some articles are subscriber-only, but it should be easier to link to them.

No, not by itself. But it was emblematic of an attack-Ginther-on-everything theme without thinking things through.

Ginther had made a ton of mistakes (example: his handling of the data breech was secretive, reckless, and incompetent), but he’s not Satan.

It’s too bad. There are good journalists working there, and we need a strong daily newspaper.

-paid promos masquerading as articles (the Dispatch’s Bluesky feed has a ton of these).

I was only once praised in an opinion, and it was when I was a fairly young lawyer, so maybe the UK practice is not so different. Judicial accolades mean so much more for newer lawyers than for more experienced ones.