
Anonymous social apps fail because anonymity removes meaning, enables meanness - pmcpinto
https://backchannel.com/these-failed-apps-discovered-a-hidden-rule-of-the-web-391471ca5952#.ajqvtw76z
======
Veen
The thesis here seems to be that social media is only worthwhile so long as it
fulfills the attention-seeking impulse of people like the author.

I may be unusual but I avoid Facebook precisely because I don't want that sort
of attention directed at my brain farts and the ephemeral detritus of my
everyday life.

When I make something worthwhile and of substance, that's different, but I
won't be putting it on Facebook.

~~~
Xeoncross
> it fulfills the attention-seeking impulse of people

That is most of the market share. We all want attention, but a small percent
of people look for it in non-compromising ways.

~~~
M_Grey
For so long, FB and that kind of social media has not only been normalized,
but the people who don't use it are seen as "odd". Snowden definitely started
to change that, but there is no substitute for time and experience online.
Most people don't have much of either, so it's easy to lead them around.

I don't think that most people would have sought to publicize most details of
their lives without prompting. The reason why the prompting exists is simple
and obvious: your information is valuable product which can be packaged and
sold.

~~~
Xeoncross
I don't doubt that most people would probably not "publicize most details of
their lives" \- but the fact that we want attention is obvious.

I talk to lots of people and if I start asking them about themselves or their
life most are happy to talk about themselves as long as you don't seem like a
threat in some way.

People are naturally self-centered and enjoy attention. Kids are the best
example of that.

~~~
M_Grey
I agree that people want attention, but I think the notion of gaining
attention through notoriety online is generally a bad idea. It is however,
very profitable for people to seek that kind of notoriety, and unprofitable
for people to be anonymous.

------
yarrel
Real Names do not solve this, though.

From the WELL through YouTube to Twitter, people will be mean under their irl
identities.

And there are real social costs to removing anonymity, which
disproportionately fall on precisely the kind of people you'd want to stop
meanness against.

------
Jeaye
Obligatory link to The Real Name Fallacy: [https://blog.coralproject.net/the-
real-name-fallacy/](https://blog.coralproject.net/the-real-name-fallacy/)

A great deal of research has been done on this, since back in the Usenet days.

~~~
devopsproject
Or you could just look at facebook comments

------
kefka
And I look at these 'apps' and I think:

"Usenet did it better, and semi-anonymous, and ubiquitous."

------
CM30
So how come more general anonymous forums work? Because while parts of 4chan
and other similar sites are topic based, the likes of /b/ are just a general
free for all. Why do people continue posting there if it's anonymous and
generalised?

Why are the general discussion sections of anonymous imageboards the most
popular part of said sites?

~~~
grillvogel
4chan consistently features some of the worst posts you'll ever see, as well
as the most brilliant things you'll ever read or see on the internet. no other
site can replicate this, and for many, those diamonds are worth putting up
with the garbage

~~~
M_Grey
Like actual diamonds, I'd rather wait for their to erupt to the surface, than
mine through all of that dirt.

~~~
grillvogel
the quality is pretty diluted by that point

~~~
M_Grey
Diamonds are mercifully unchanged by their journey through a kimberlite tube.
It's true, you still have to break them out of the rock, but it's better than
swimming through mantle!

~~~
grillvogel
they aren't literally diamonds that was just a metaphor. delicate memes don't
always survive the journey to the surface

~~~
M_Grey
I know what you meant, I was extending the metaphor. I would rather crack
rocks for diamonds on the surface, than swim through shit below. I realize
that's a preference issue, not a "right way / wrong way" issue for the record.

------
decasteve
The most valuable online communities, newsgroups, forums, etc, that I've been
taking part in over the past 23 years have been pseudoanonymous. In the 1990s,
we were attached to our handles/aliases/pseudonyms. We would become known by
these online names, separate from our "real" identity, but they did have
meaning. People knew you online by that identity. You could stop using that
pseudonym but you would lose the connection to your community built up on that
name.

------
golergka
Honest question: why did these app try to remove abusive content? Did they
actually see a correlation between abuse and users leaving the app?

~~~
jlebrech
investors demanded it i'm sure

~~~
golergka
Why?

~~~
snerbles
Probably in an effort to be "friendly" to potential advertisers. They usually
don't like their products appearing next to potentially abusive content.

------
darawk
What about 4chan? That's pretty successful.

------
lawless123
Didn't someone get arrested for making threats via Yik Yak? it's psuedo-
anonymous .

------
transfire
So you start out believing in free expression, then special interests hammer
you in main stream media and you cave. Your business falls apart. And we end
up with a self-inflicted nanny state that squashes dissension and reality, and
prevents people from actually evolving.

------
diyseguy
If this were true, then Usenet would never have been a success. It only died
because Google bought DejaNews and then killed it.

------
wheelerwj
the author has never heard of 4chan?

------
jlebrech
they went downhill when they asked users to come up with a handle.

------
ashark
Declickbaited:

Anonymous Social Networking Apps Fail Because Anonymity Removes Meaning,
Enables Meanness

(and the apps focused on by the article are Secret and Yik Yak)

~~~
oblio
> Enables Meanness

Now that's an understatement, if I ever saw one. I'd call it more of a "stand
underneath a waterfall of sewage".

~~~
ashark
Article used the word "meanness" so I did too.

Which is, of course, not remotely a "hidden" rule, and may be one of the _best
known_ rules of the Internet. Penny Arcade gave it a name, years ago: The
Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory. So the headline's not just uselessly hiding
info to be clickbait, it's _lying_.

------
throwaway420
> Without names attached, people’s words become either mean — or meaningless.

The complete opposite is true.

The true meanlessness in society is the bland echo chamber on places like
Facebook where everybody parrots the politically correct ideas they're told to
say by the corporate media.

With real names and identities attached, most people are usually pressured
away from saying any idea that goes outside of the narrow 3 x 5 Card of
Official Approved Public Opinion. Real names and identities create an echo
chamber of political correctness and trying your damnedest NOT to offend
anybody lest you ruin your social or career prospects. Sure, some people
trickle in truth sometimes, but enough people are silenced so that people who
hold normal opinions are made to feel like they're the minority.

As far as meanness goes, sure freedom sometimes gives people the ability to
say dumb things, but there's no way to curb that without restricting freedom.
But honestly, the true meanness in society is not people telling the truth and
leading them down a road to ruin. To give a very minor example: you're not
supposed to say the truth about fat people because we have a body acceptance
movement that has declared that everybody fat is beautiful and no choices are
unhealthy. Wishing that something was the case doesn't make it so and denying
reality and "not being mean" leads to people destroying their lives. The real
mean thing in this case is to stay silent and deny reality and not tell the
truth.

~~~
GrinningFool
> With real names and identities attached, most people are usually pressured
> away from saying any idea that goes outside of the narrow 3 x 5 Card of
> Official Approved Public Opinion.

I'm just wondering if you've looked at any hot topic that uses disqus or
facebook for comments?

People aren't exactly reluctant to speak their minds, with their real names
attached

~~~
jameskegel
a small subset does not justify the norm.

