Do HWZ forum guidelines permit IBs?

[Śūnyatā]

how to check if they belong to a IB ?

Personally I would approach the challenge of identifying/managing IBs using the following mechanisms:

* provide clear rules that forbid remunerated posts of any form (paid per post and/or employment and/or contractual)

* sentiment analysis - automated map of vocabulary, emotions, tones, recurrent phrases for each user - this allows automated flagging of accounts that are shared by different people as well as the inverse issue of clones

* sentiment scoring - automated conversion of sentiment within a post/thread into a positivity/negativity metric, users accumulate positive/negative scores as they post and an aggregated value is displayed together with the reaction score in the user profile

* word clouds - generate publicly accessible word clouds for each user within a thread and across all posts within a given time frame. These help to visually identify most commonly used terms and words by users and in posts

IBs are driven by specific biased agendas and so sentiment analysis/scoring for their posts over time will generate sentiment values that deviate significantly from the norm.

 

[DrAwkward]

Personally I would approach the challenge of identifying/managing IBs using the following mechanisms:

* provide clear rules that forbid remunerated posts of any form (paid per post and/or employment and/or contractual)

* sentiment analysis - automated map of vocabulary, emotions, tones, recurrent phrases for each user - this allows automated flagging of accounts that are shared by different people as well as the inverse issue of clones

* sentiment scoring - automated conversion of sentiment within a post/thread into a positivity/negativity metric, users accumulate positive/negative scores as they post and an aggregated value is displayed together with the reaction score in the user profile

* word clouds - generate publicly accessible word clouds for each user within a thread and across all posts within a given time frame. These help to visually identify most commonly used terms and words by users and in posts

IBs are driven by specific biased agendas and so sentiment analysis/scoring for their posts over time will generate sentiment values that deviate significantly from the norm.

On the ground whole day bashing PAP, but 160 still can put "support for pap is at all time high". Do you still want to trust their sentiment analysis?

 

[csc12345678]

* provide clear rules that forbid remunerated posts of any form (paid per post and/or employment and/or contractual)

* sentiment analysis - automated map of vocabulary, emotions, tones, recurrent phrases for each user - this allows automated flagging of accounts that are shared by different people as well as the inverse issue of clones

* sentiment scoring - automated conversion of sentiment within a post/thread into a positivity/negativity metric, users accumulate positive/negative scores as they post and an aggregated value is displayed together with the reaction score in the user profile

* word clouds - generate publicly accessible word clouds for each user within a thread and across all posts within a given time frame. These help to visually identify most commonly used terms and words by users and in posts

IBs are driven by specific biased agendas and so sentiment analysis/scoring for their posts over time will generate sentiment values that deviate significantly from the norm.

You can do the AI part but how do you decide they are IB ? What kind of sentiments determine IBs ?

How to know they are paid ?

 

[Śūnyatā]

You can do the AI part but how do you decide they are IB ? What kind of sentiments determine IBs ?

How to know they are paid ?

Once the AI flags a user as a suspected IB, an automated message is sent from a moderator's account to the user requiring him or her to confirm that he or she has not been paid to post in the forum. Per the terms and conditions of the forum, a false declaration made in response to this message will subject the user to civil liability and the response shall serve as evidence in the event of civil action.

 

[csc12345678]

Once the AI flags a user as a suspected IB, an automated message is sent from a moderator's account to the user requiring him or her to confirm that he or she has not been paid to post in the forum. Per the terms and conditions of the forum, a false declaration made in response to this message will subject the user to civil liability and the response shall serve as evidence in the event of civil action.

But you have to prove that the person is an IB. How do you do that ?

 

[needsomeadvice]

Personally I would approach the challenge of identifying/managing IBs using the following mechanisms:

* provide clear rules that forbid remunerated posts of any form (paid per post and/or employment and/or contractual)

* sentiment analysis - automated map of vocabulary, emotions, tones, recurrent phrases for each user - this allows automated flagging of accounts that are shared by different people as well as the inverse issue of clones

* sentiment scoring - automated conversion of sentiment within a post/thread into a positivity/negativity metric, users accumulate positive/negative scores as they post and an aggregated value is displayed together with the reaction score in the user profile

* word clouds - generate publicly accessible word clouds for each user within a thread and across all posts within a given time frame. These help to visually identify most commonly used terms and words by users and in posts

IBs are driven by specific biased agendas and so sentiment analysis/scoring for their posts over time will generate sentiment values that deviate significantly from the norm.

Lol u gonna pay for the development and processing costs?

 

[Shion]

how many of these IB accounts belong to foreigners !?

 

[LWZ]

I am an IB of the Empire of Great Manchuria.

 

[cranthir]

Not really a complain, more of a feedback but I just want to show an example that a post was reported to be fake news but it was still rejected. From my point of view, debunking the user might lead to an argument which leads to both of us getting points, reporting without "debunking" = rejected.

this i agree. On one hand, the advice and tone set down by admins and VJ is report misinformation, on the otherhand, the mods are sending conflicting message by asking the reporter to “debunk” the threadstarter/poster

Please continue to report any misinformation.
But do note that this is a discussion forum and there will be many people with different views. Just because somebody have a different view doesn't mean its fake news.

We Mods are only volunteers and not the govt, I don't think you want us to be the final arbiter of truth.
You do other users a greater service if you can debunk the fake news in the threads than for us to delete / censor the threads. For blatantly False and Misleading threads like say "Biden is dead", we do dish out the points.
Just engage in a polite and civil manner thanks

 

[needsomeadvice]

Please continue to report any misinformation.
But do note that this is a discussion forum and there will be many people with different views. Just because somebody have a different view doesn't mean its fake news.

We Mods are only volunteers and not the govt, I don't think you want us to be the final arbiter of truth.
You do other users a greater service if you can debunk the fake news in the threads than for us to delete / censor the threads. For blatantly False and Misleading threads like say "Biden is dead", we do dish out the points.
Just engage in a polite and civil manner thanks

Agree with your position and explanation on being the final arbiter of truth. Thank you for the explanation.

 

[Miss.FatFat]

Please continue to report any misinformation.
But do note that this is a discussion forum and there will be many people with different views. Just because somebody have a different view doesn't mean its fake news.

We Mods are only volunteers and not the govt, I don't think you want us to be the final arbiter of truth.
You do other users a greater service if you can debunk the fake news in the threads than for us to delete / censor the threads. For blatantly False and Misleading threads like say "Biden is dead", we do dish out the points.
Just engage in a polite and civil manner thanks

Personal view is fine but how about repeat foreign interference by constant pushing communist news or quoting other politician's blatant lies? Isn't that borderline FICA? One or two times ok but a lot of times? Like people keep creating thread title with these foreign misinformation which can be debunked easily. For example, thread title with RT news reporting china officials saying some lies that "usa did not do it" but facts debunk that usa did it or the recent deepfake of zelensky surrending?

Creating this misinformation thread maybe fine but what if despite facts proven, some people keep posting such threads and constantly upvoting these misinformation to parade their agenda around it on the basis of speech quote or debunked falsehood, not facts? No points for that?

So does that not count as misinformation but different view just because it is from official news outlet? Never wanted for that thread to be lock or delete but since you said "Please continue to report any misinformation." and "different view is fine", shouldn't such thread's first post be at least green label as misinformation once debunked easily?

 

[Yueming]

Why don't you share the reason why you were removed from Mod status?

So far I noticed actions were taken to Mods who don't exercise moderation or fairness themselves.

do you even know when I was a mod?

please do not associate me with the moderation post-SPH thank you.

 

[aromilk]

Please continue to report any misinformation.
But do note that this is a discussion forum and there will be many people with different views. Just because somebody have a different view doesn't mean its fake news.

We Mods are only volunteers and not the govt, I don't think you want us to be the final arbiter of truth.
You do other users a greater service if you can debunk the fake news in the threads than for us to delete / censor the threads. For blatantly False and Misleading threads like say "Biden is dead", we do dish out the points.
Just engage in a polite and civil manner thanks

hi,

a few of us has reported this TS for misinformation. He claims Zelensky is using green screen but offers no proof to substantiate.

https://forums.hardwarezone.com.sg/threads/gvgt-zelensky-is-not-in-ukraine.6718017/
In fact, another forumer also posted something similar a week ago and was reported to be sharing fake news. See post #59

https://forums.hardwarezone.com.sg/threads/gvgt-zelensky-is-not-in-ukraine.6718017/post-140529515

 

[SUNNYSUNNY0000]

hi,

a few of us has reported this TS for misinformation. He claims Zelensky is using green screen but offers no proof to substantiate.

https://forums.hardwarezone.com.sg/threads/gvgt-zelensky-is-not-in-ukraine.6718017/
In fact, another forumer also posted something similar a week ago and was reported to be sharing fake news. See post #59

https://forums.hardwarezone.com.sg/threads/gvgt-zelensky-is-not-in-ukraine.6718017/post-140529515

The mod like not very responsive when comes to such report. My putinmao poll very fast tio locked

 

[cranthir]

Personal view is fine but how about repeat foreign interference by constant pushing communist news or quoting other politician's blatant lies? Isn't that borderline FICA? One or two times ok but a lot of times? Like people keep creating thread title with these foreign misinformation which can be debunked easily. For example, thread title with RT news reporting china officials saying some lies that "usa did not do it" but facts debunk that usa did it or the recent deepfake of zelensky surrending?

Creating this misinformation thread maybe fine but what if despite facts proven, some people keep posting such threads and constantly upvoting these misinformation to parade their agenda around it on the basis of speech quote or debunked falsehood, not facts? No points for that?

So does that not count as misinformation but different view just because it is from official news outlet? Never wanted for that thread to be lock or delete but since you said "Please continue to report any misinformation." and "different view is fine", shouldn't such thread's first post be at least green label as misinformation once debunked easily?

repeated foreign interference and constantly pushing pro foreign news - we do ban, like sayang but it have to very extreme and pretty blatant for us to ban. Most of the time, its very hard to say for sure somebody is a foreign agent. you can refer to Dragon post above.

https://forums.hardwarezone.com.sg/threads/do-hwz-forum-guidelines-permit-ibs.6715564/post-140445171
Regarding official news, its very hard to be sure that what is official is true since as you pointed out Russian official say this, US official say that and Chinese officials say that, so we cannot trust these officials but you want to trust what HWZ moderators decide is true?

I do not think its reasonable for Moderators to play the role of Pofma in the forum for contentious topics.

For continuously spamming their views or provoking fight with people or trying to derail threads posting stuffs irrelevant to thread, such case are clear cut to moderate.
We do take action.
Clear cut fake news that can be verified like say "Biden is dead" or even posting old news, yes we can put a misinfo tag or simply lock the thread..

but a lot of contentious topics like say Bio labs in Ukraine or WMD in Iraq, how can moderators know for sure? this is a discussion forum, its easier for the truth to surface by letting you guys have the freedom to share and debunk instead of us deleting the thread.
Its impossible that we moderators are more to up to date on new info than all forum users.

Hope you understand that such kind of Pofma power can be very easily abused and its best not to depend on Mods to tell you what is the truth.

Thanks

 

[Miss.FatFat]

repeated foreign interference and constantly pushing pro foreign news - we do ban, like sayang but it have to very extreme and pretty blatant for us to ban. Most of the time, its very hard to say for sure somebody is a foreign agent. you can refer to Dragon post above.

https://forums.hardwarezone.com.sg/threads/do-hwz-forum-guidelines-permit-ibs.6715564/post-140445171
Regarding official news, its very hard to be sure that what is official is true since as you pointed out Russian official say this, US official say that and Chinese officials say that, so we cannot trust these officials but you want to trust what HWZ moderators decide is true?

I do not think its reasonable for Moderators to play the role of Pofma in the forum for contentious topics.

For continuously spamming their views or provoking fight with people or trying to derail threads posting stuffs irrelevant to thread, such case are clear cut to moderate.
We do take action.
Clear cut fake news that can be verified like say "Biden is dead" or even posting old news, yes we can put a misinfo tag or simply lock the thread..

but a lot of contentious topics like say Bio labs in Ukraine or WMD in Iraq, how can moderators know for sure? this is a discussion forum, its easier for the truth to surface by letting you guys have the freedom to share and debunk instead of us deleting the thread.
Its impossible that we moderators are more to up to date on new info than all forum users.

Hope you understand that such kind of Pofma power can be very easily abused and its best not to depend on Mods to tell you what is the truth.

Thanks

I agree that it is totally impossible for mod to judge who say is right or determine the truth of contentious topics. I totally understand where you are coming from but I think you misinterpret what I actually want to mean. I meant the recent events that had established rather than who says is right. I will put it more precisely with examples.

Take for example, trump said biden is dead. it is just a claim. but what i actually meant the event itself - 'biden is dead' is fake news but people keep using this 'event' to keep upvoting misinformation around.

One good recent example. Here we have news saying zelensky is surrendering.
https://www.scmp.com/news/world/rus...ensky-urges-russian-troops-surrender-and-well
It did not happen, is deepfake and has been debunked by several sources but i'm only citing one. Google it and you have a long list.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/zachar...ansmits-fake-zelensky-surrender-announcement/
Now, it is perfectly fine to say putin said zelensky is surrendering. But i think thread should be mislabel for posting direct misinformation event itself like "SCMP/RT: zelensky is surrendering!!" "zelensky is running and leaving its citizens to die!!" instead of "chinese media claims zelensky is surrendering". It is alright to cite, quote, discuss but not right to forcefully push event which did not happen, just like 'biden is dead'.

Another closest example with grey example is here:
https://forums.hardwarezone.com.sg/...ato-over-russia-demand.6717043/post-140494955
User copy paste a politician's lies and emphasize that NATO did not compensate based on politician's speech which i debunked easily with facts that NATO did compensate, just 4 posts down with correct sources. I'm more concern of what happen "whether NATO compensate" rather than "who claims is right". Some users hold hostage of such misinformation event and spreading lies on the basis of such inaccurate events.

Hope what I explained above belongs to your "Clear cut fake news that can be verified like say "Biden is dead" or even posting old news, yes we can put a misinfo tag.

 

[Mecisteus]

I suggest Mods to just ignore on misinformation about issues NOT related to SG.

There are just too many news about the war and people in SG are generally not affected by those news.

Most important is please enforce that every threadatarter to include their source on post #1. I notice some members are creating threads without any source.

 

[cranthir]

I agree that it is totally impossible for mod to judge who say is right or determine the truth of contentious topics. I totally understand where you are coming from but I think you misinterpret what I actually want to mean. I meant the recent events that had established rather than who says is right. I will put it more precisely with examples.

Take for example, trump said biden is dead. it is just a claim. but what i actually meant the event itself - 'biden is dead' is fake news but people keep using this 'event' to keep upvoting misinformation around.

One good recent example. Here we have news saying zelensky is surrendering.
https://www.scmp.com/news/world/rus...ensky-urges-russian-troops-surrender-and-well
It did not happen, is deepfake and has been debunked by several sources but i'm only citing one. Google it and you have a long list.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/zachar...ansmits-fake-zelensky-surrender-announcement/
Now, it is perfectly fine to say putin said zelensky is surrendering. But i think thread should be mislabel for posting direct misinformation event itself like "SCMP/RT: zelensky is surrendering!!" "zelensky is running and leaving its citizens to die!!" instead of "chinese media claims zelensky is surrendering". It is alright to cite, quote, discuss but not right to forcefully push event which did not happen, just like 'biden is dead'.

Another closest example with grey example is here:
https://forums.hardwarezone.com.sg/...ato-over-russia-demand.6717043/post-140494955
User copy paste a politician's lies and emphasize that NATO did not compensate based on politician's speech which i debunked easily with facts that NATO did compensate, just 4 posts down with correct sources. I'm more concern of what happen "whether NATO compensate" rather than "who claims is right". Some users hold hostage of such misinformation event and spreading lies on the basis of such inaccurate events.

Hope what I explained above belongs to your "Clear cut fake news that can be verified like say "Biden is dead" or even posting old news, yes we can put a misinfo tag.

first of all, the first SCMP link is on Zelensky asking Russian to surrender, not Zelensky surrendering as you claim,

the 2nd link claim the surrender news was fake news, thats fine, but can you let me know which users and which thread is falsely claiming that Zelensky surrendered?

In the third link thread, I think its a great example of how users like you can help debunk inaccurate information when moderators leave the thread open instead of us shutting it down.

We mods cannot be expected to factcheck every statement by every politicians, there is the whole point of a discussion forum so you guys can discuss and share info.

 

[Miss.FatFat]

first of all, the first SCMP link is on Zelensky asking Russian to surrender, not Zelensky surrendering as you claim,

the 2nd link claim the surrender news was fake news, thats fine, but can you let me know which users and which thread is falsely claiming that Zelensky surrendered?

In the third link thread, I think its a great example of how users like you can help debunk inaccurate information when moderators leave the thread open instead of us shutting it down.

We mods cannot be expected to factcheck every statement by every politicians, there is the whole point of a discussion forum so you guys can discuss and share info.

My bad here for overlooking the first sentence leading to bad examples. I mentioned there were examples but I guessed by now, you get what i'm trying to mean here.
News A established "an event" happened but is debunked by several sources later. People making threads, "News A: Event happened!" or directly "Event happened!". Should the thread deserve a green label for misinformation once truth is out? I'm not asking for a lock/delete here but should be label for fake news awareness.
And if users continue to spin lies to push their agenda/spam their view on the basis of those "fake event happened", should they be infracted? I mean they can disagree or agree many things but if they said "putin will take over because biden is dead" on that basis of fake 'biden is dead' or 'russia has won because zelensky surrendered'? Then I guess we're on the same page?

 

[aromilk]

I think the crux here is “click bait title”.

Often, people just comment or upvote without reading the content.