this post was submitted on 29 Aug 2024
109 points (89.8% liked)

News

23311 readers
3690 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The news mod team has asked to no longer be a part of the project until we have a composite tool that polls multiple sources for a more balanced view.

It will take a few hours, but FOR NOW there won't be a bot giving reviews of the source.

The goal was simple: make it easier to show biased sources. This was to give you and the mods a better view of what we were looking at.

The mod team is in agreement: one source of truth isn't enough. We are working on a tool to give a composite score, from multiple sources, all open source.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] gedaliyah@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago (22 children)

About half of the unique comments by my count are suggestions for improvements or expressions of support. The 10 posts with the most downvotes are all requests to remove the bot.

Let's be realistic - this is far from consensus.

[–] fine_sandy_bottom@lemmy.federate.cc 15 points 2 months ago (21 children)

The 10 posts with the most downvotes are all requests to remove the bot.

These are some highlights from the top 12 posts sorted by "top"...

  1. "My personal view is to remove the bot."
  2. "One problem I’ve noticed is that the bot doesn’t differentiate between news articles and opinion pieces."
  3. "You don’t need every post to have a comment basically saying “this source is ok”
  4. "I think it should be removed"
  5. "My personal view is that the bot provides a net negative, and should be removed." <- me
  6. "Partisan fact-checking sites are worse than no fact-checking at all."
  7. "Remove it."
  8. "MBFC’s ratings for “factual reporting” are a joke."
  9. "This thread is a mess." <- also me, sorry
  10. "The bot is basically a spammer saying “THIS ARTICLE SUCKS EVEN THOUGH I DIDN’T READ IT” on every damn post. If that was a normal user account you’d ban it."
  11. "The majority of feedback has been negative. I can’t recall a single person arguing in its favor, but I can think of many, myself included, arguing against it."
  12. "In literally every thread I’ve seen it post in, it gets downvoted to hell."

To put it charitably, 2 and 6 are only mildly critical or express tepid support, at best. The remainder are... something less than supportive.

I understand that this is not a democracy, and that it's ultimately up to your good selves to guide the community as you see fit. However, I think there are valid criticisms to be made regarding your collective ability to engage with feedback.

[–] Blackbeard@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (10 children)

First, admins have pointed out that dozens of accounts (now banned) were being used to artificially boost certain kinds of feedback and bury others, so if we're not allowed to point to votes as a source of valid information, then sorting by "top" is equally invalid. Those could simply have been the comments those alts decided they wanted to push to the top, to make their point.

Second, we're volunteers who have a few hours set aside each day to open a discussion into things that need to be updated or changed, and the vitriol that's been hurled at us is disproportionate compared to the ostensible "damage" being done by a single automated script. One moderator threatened to resign over the hate that's been blasted into their face. It took us less than two weeks to post a request for feedback, and then to act on that feedback. You (the disapprovers) all got exactly what you wanted. Pardon me for being blunt, but what the hell else are you expecting from us?

[–] Five@slrpnk.net 8 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

As stated elsewhere in the thread, my vote audit shows no participation from any of the 29 banned sock accounts the in the !news feedback thread, or this one for that matter. Please take the votes more seriously. If you'd like to spread FUD about the legitimacy of a vote, ask an admin to audit them first so you can state with evidence that a specific vote has been manipulated.

People trust the software to tell them what others are thinking, and if you successfully spread the false idea that votes that disagree with you are manipulated, you're not just arguing in bad faith, you're undermining the federated system we should all want to succeed.

[–] Blackbeard@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago
  1. Thank you. I don't have that kind of audit authority and all we were told is that vote manipulation was occurring. We'd love to have you join the team if you'd like to help.

  2. We took all of the feedback seriously because the bot is gone. I'm really not sure why people keep pretending like we haven't already acted on it.

  3. That you'd call this "spreading FUD" or"bad faith" is, frankly, insulting. I can only act on the information I have. In the end, I said that manipulation made assessing the situation difficult, but we still followed through accordingly. We are volunteering our time, and you lying about our intentions isn't helping either.

I only have a few hours per day to devote to this. If you think you can do better, then step up.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (18 replies)
load more comments (18 replies)