I promised to start sending spot-checks on Santa’s judgements. Here they are. I’ll post them as individual comments, because the formatting is more understandable that way.
NOT BANNED indicates someone who isn’t banned by the algorithm, but almost.
BANNED indicates someone who is banned by the algorithm, but only just.
For each user, you’ll see a snapshot of what comments they have left recently that garnered negative rank (red stripes, downvotes) or positive rank (blue stripes, upvotes). Time goes left to right, the top part of the bar shows their bad or good rank, and the bottom part of the bar links it up to the key down below, showing which posts led to what rankings. Then, down below that, there’s a quote showing a representative example of why the algorithm thinks they’re a problem.
My hope is that by showing where the boundary is, how obnoxious you have to be and how consistently your comments have to get downvotes in order for the algorithm to ban you, people will better understand how it works.
But who knows? Maybe I have it all wrong, and this robot moderator is ushering in a whole new robot dystopia right here on Slrpnk, and this is the evidence. Let me know what you think in the comments.
Edit: Explained the bar code more, and the purpose behind this whole thing.
BANNED
Example comment, from the post Don’t Fall for the Third-Party Trick:
One, I don’t know any progressive that is planning on voting for RFK.
Two, can we stop this lie? Only a vote for Trump is a vote for Trump.
NOT BANNED
Example comment, from the post Black man found dead against tree with rope around his neck in NC: ‘Not a lynching,’ sheriff says:
He said Magee went to a nearby Walmart shortly before he died. That is where he is believed to have bought the rope found around his neck.
If this young man bought the rope himself, if there is evidence of this like surveillance video, that paints this situation in a pretty different light.
Edit: I want to be very clear that the police should be presenting any evidence they have of this. I would not take the police at their word. My comment here hinges on the report being true.
Ho ho ho seems we got our gold medalist right here
NOT BANNED
Example comment, from the post According to hexbear: All americans are settlers who should settle a different country to atone for the crimes of their forefathers…:
Why not? Amerikkkans don’t have an ethnicity or culture anyway
BANNED
Example comment, from the post Let’s do something and help each other.:
The concept of Democrats doing helpful and useful things is utterly laughable. Straw-men for EVERYONE!!!
NOT BANNED
Example post: Kamala Safe And In Stable Condition After Attempted Interview
BANNED
Example comment, from the post Artist is Suing Copyright Office For Refusing to Register His AI Image
It’s nothing like photography. It takes zero special training to feed an AI a prompt. Yes, photographers, who held their camera, who spent years honing their craft, learning the ins and out of the art of photography, who put their bodies in the field to capture real life, yes, they should be able to copyright their work.
It absolutely takes training to familiarize yourself with the model and get the results you want.
Copyright or not doesnt change time and effort that can be spent on prompting. Theres no reason to have an objective stance against people that want to explore it.