Norwegian News Site Sifts out Trolls with Quiz for Commenters

Zarathustra[H]

Zarathustra[H]

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
38,828
Are you tired of dealing with outraged commenters rage-posting about an article they haven't even read, making incorrect assumptions based only on the title? Norwegian broadcaster NRK is. They are testing a new system in their comments, where anyone who wants to comment on an article has to pass a quick and simple quiz before being allowed to post. The theory is that not only will the quality of debate improve if you make sure that everyone posting actually read the article, but also that taking the time to answer a quiz might give the most outraged posters a little bit of time to calm down before starting their post.

Sometimes I wonder if we could do this here... Kyle?

Translation:
Do you want to comment? Answer a quiz!
We are improving the quality of our comments section. Because of this, we want to make sure that anyone who comments has actually read the article. Correctly answer the questions below to unlock the comments.

"The way it works is that prior to being allowed to comment on a story, the reader is required to take a quiz answering three multiple choice questions relating to the content of the article they wish to comment on.

In a recent story about an advanced search engine called Stalkscan.com, for example, the quiz included questions about who developed Stalkscan and what year Facebook launched its Graph search feature."
 
This is stupid, those French shouldn't be making users of their site take a test on their nationality, ridiculous. This is why the British helped us win the war of independance!
 
Something similar should be made for youtube videos.
 
Well, this would certainly be useful such as with Yahoo. I'm sick of every article there having most of the comments being political with topics that have absolutely nothing to do with what's being discussed.
 
The news business was very excited to hear from people until the people actually started to weigh in with unapproved positions and unvetted opinions.

I think Western Civ needs to gut up and stop being babies about free speech. Yes some people troll, but they only encourage it with their reactions.
 
DoubleTap said:
The news business was very excited to hear from people until the people actually started to weigh in with unapproved positions and unvetted opinions.

I think Western Civ needs to gut up and stop being babies about free speech. Yes some people troll, but they only encourage it with their reactions.
Click to expand...

Well, there is a difference between free speech, and intentionally spreading harmful misinformation. In some cases the latter has been deemed an exception to the first amendment. The classic example that is always used is "Yelling 'Fire!' in a crowded theater." I can imagine that his may have other applications as well.

Besides, freedom of speech doesn't mean that companies can't decline to have you post on their sites. The first amendment to the constitution only guarantees freedom from persecution by the government based on your speech. It does not imbue anyone with the right to be heard by others whenever they please, especially when using someone else's service to do so.

Besides, efforts like these help save people from themselves. If they don't read the article they are commenting on, and make the wrong conclusions, they are going to make an ass out of themselves. If they first have to demonstrate that they actually read what they are commenting on, the chances of this are much smaller.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
If they don't read the article they are commenting on, and make the wrong conclusions, they are going to make an ass out of themselves.
Click to expand...

You know what? I'm tired of being 'tested.' Captcha, quizzes, click here bait, when does it end!? As a rage poster, and as someone that posts only after reading the headline, this censorship and discrimination must stop! I'm perfectly capable of making an ass out of myself without any damn quiz!
 
I think we should all eat Apples for breakfast.
Totally irrelevant to the TOPIC.
Kind of like all the other stupid comments I see.
So we only get 1 comment on an article because the Sheeple cant read or write for that matter?

Democrats are like Sheeple they will never get it that the "Donald is really the President"<<<<<<<<<<Sheeple bait! ROFLMAO
 
Asshole marketers and spammers will accidentally invent sentient asshole marketer AI that will go on to take over the world.
 
not actually a bad idea. at least you have a pretty good idea that somebody read the article... or just good at guessing :p
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
Besides, efforts like these help save people from themselves. If they don't read the article they are commenting on, and make the wrong conclusions, they are going to make an ass out of themselves. If they first have to demonstrate that they actually read what they are commenting on, the chances of this are much smaller.
Click to expand...

This doesn't make sense. The shame of making an ass of oneself usually forces behavioral correction, at least for a while. Your scenario here impedes social pressure to correct undesirable behavior.

What will actually happen is that people who don't care about the article still won't read it, let alone submit to a pop quiz over an article they already don't care about. Spammers will be momentarily deterred until helpful AI projects come along to defeat the multiple questionnaire, much like how robots can defeat CAPCHA checkboxes.
 
DoubleTap said:
The news business was very excited to hear from people until the people actually started to weigh in with unapproved positions and unvetted opinions.

I think Western Civ needs to gut up and stop being babies about free speech. Yes some people troll, but they only encourage it with their reactions.
Click to expand...

I agree with this, with the caveat that news organizations have always filtered unapproved positions. Notice how letters to the editor in newspapers all seem to generally agree with the viewpoint of the newspaper, with perhaps one or two token mild disagreements from people who still fundamentally accept the premise of the topic.
 
Terpfen said:
This doesn't make sense. The shame of making an ass of oneself usually forces behavioral correction, at least for a while. Your scenario here impedes social pressure to correct undesirable behavior.

What will actually happen is that people who don't care about the article still won't read it, let alone submit to a pop quiz over an article they already don't care about. Spammers will be momentarily deterred until helpful AI projects come along to defeat the multiple questionnaire, much like how robots can defeat CAPCHA checkboxes.
Click to expand...

Dunno, do you see the idiotic comments people will make even under their real Facebook profiles on public comment threads, much less anon comment strings?

And forget about making an ass of yourself, what about just being able to have a conversation about a topic without random bullshit just cluttering it?
 
Won't keep out the paid commenters but will make it tougher for them to earn a living.
 
TAP said:
Won't keep out the paid commenters but will make it tougher for them to earn a living.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I don't see this as a form of censorship. No one is talking about blocking certain opinions here. People are free to express whatever opinion they may have, they just have to show that they have read the article first.

The hope is that once they do, they may have a more nuanced and educated opinion relevant to the topic at hand, bu there is nothing preventing them from posting whatever opinion they may have on the article.
 
Terpfen said:
The shame of making an ass of oneself usually forces behavioral correction, at least for a while.
Click to expand...

35899753.jpg
 
TwistedAegis said:
And forget about making an ass of yourself, what about just being able to have a conversation about a topic without random bullshit just cluttering it?
Click to expand...

A well curated ignore list takes care of that. Alternatively, just... scroll past the annoying stuff.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
Well, there is a difference between free speech, and intentionally spreading harmful misinformation. In some cases the latter has been deemed an exception to the first amendment. The classic example that is always used is "Yelling 'Fire!' in a crowded theater." I can imagine that his may have other applications as well.

Besides, freedom of speech doesn't mean that companies can't decline to have you post on their sites. The first amendment to the constitution only guarantees freedom from persecution by the government based on your speech. It does not imbue anyone with the right to be heard by others whenever they please, especially when using someone else's service to do so.

Besides, efforts like these help save people from themselves. If they don't read the article they are commenting on, and make the wrong conclusions, they are going to make an ass out of themselves. If they first have to demonstrate that they actually read what they are commenting on, the chances of this are much smaller.
Click to expand...

We do have the freedom to yell fire in a crowded theater - as long as there is a fire. We also don't prevent people from yelling it when there isn't a fire - we hold them accountable afterwards.

The standard of "intentionally spreading harmful misinformation" is so subjective and so broad that it can be used to cover anything that anyone disagrees with.

Also, I didn't cite the first amendment - it clearly does not bind private companies, but I'm making the point that we should expect the companies we deal with and work for to uphold the western value of free speech. We should be less tolerant of the companies that we deal with being hostile to free speech.

There are a number of protections that online service operators enjoy (like not being liable for material that others post) as long as they don't exercise certain controls. We should be reviewing and restructuring those protections in a way that incentivizes companies to uphold free speech by default - because it's easier and because it's expected. Of course you should be able to also run a service that is less free and more controlled (religious and political affiliations, for example) but you should then identify as such and not be able to pretend to be something you're not (facebook, twitter, looking at both of you).
 
If Trump weren't out President, we wouldn't have to worry about rats in the dugout in that small village.

I'm all for it. I don't think it'd do much good, though. Some people are pretty invested in trolling. If a dig at a President or ex-President can be had, they'll go through the motions.
 
Robergal said:
I think we should all eat Apples for breakfast.
Totally irrelevant to the TOPIC.
Kind of like all the other stupid comments I see.
So we only get 1 comment on an article because the Sheeple cant read or write for that matter?

Democrats are like Sheeple they will never get it that the "Donald is really the President"<<<<<<<<<<Sheeple bait! ROFLMAO
Click to expand...

^-----Obviously copied someone else's answers or used an exploit to get around it and comment here :eek:;)
 
^-----Obviously copied someone else's answers or used an exploit to get around it and comment here :eek:;)
Click to expand...
See its working already.

What was the question again?
 
Shotglass01 said:
You know what? I'm tired of being 'tested.' Captcha, quizzes, click here bait, when does it end!? As a rage poster, and as someone that posts only after reading the headline, this censorship and discrimination must stop! I'm perfectly capable of making an ass out of myself without any damn quiz!
Click to expand...

And that's the thing they will find out shortly- Taking a quiz is just going to make the rager more ragey. People with a one track agenda are not going to let some little quiz keep them from their self important duty of spreading that agenda.

Have these people ever seen the internet?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top