@danilo just encountered this thread but: the thing they shipped doesn't make people safer. it gives users a feature they've been asking for that makes them *feel* safer.

Not necessarily a criticism btw. It's interesting to me that when this kinda thing is proposed in the Masto/fedi ecosystem, the response is "yeah but it doesn't WORK it just tricks people into having a sense of safety."

imo it can be ok to design for sense of safety as long as you work to ensure real safety at the same time

2
Share
Share on Mastodon
Share on Twitter
Share on Facebook
Share on Linkedin
Darius Kazemi

@danilo for those reading, here's more on how it doesn't really do a lot: howtodotechystuff.wordpress.co

again... I think maybe you need feel-good features like this even if they don't do much. I think the main argument against implementing stuff like this is that providing users an exaggerated sense of safety is harmful. otoh those same people will champion e2e encryption with timed disappearing messages even though people can screenshot their way around it so. lol who can say

0
2d
Erin Kissane

@darius Dropping OP to quibble—I think this comes down to what "safety" is.

My unproven sense is that adding friction to pile-ons in this way sharply reduces the intensity and volume of pile-ons, mostly both because casual trolls and especially the randos they recruit are lazy. (Also it's a signal to reasonably rule-abiding arguers that argument isn't welcome.)

I think reducing volume + intensity is a real plus for psychological safety and well-being rather than "feel good" (derogatory).

1
2d
Replies