Slashdot Mirror


One Percent of Reddit Users Cause 75 Percent of the Drama (theoutline.com)

Just 1 percent of all Reddit communities set off 74 percent of all conflicts on the site, a new research has found. The Outline: In the self-published research from Srijan Kumar, Jure Leskoec, William Hamilton, and Dan Jurafsky of Stanford University, "intercommunity conflict" is defined as "negative sentiment to comment in another community." These users wouldn't necessarily qualify as trolls or sockpuppets; they're instigators, posting links to other subreddits and encouraging other users to target, harass, and fight with users on that subreddit.

13 of 183 comments (clear)

  1. 1% of the internet.. by sqorbit · · Score: 4, Funny

    ..causes all the drama. The rest of us just make memes about it.

    --
    Sent from my TARDIS
    1. Re:1% of the internet.. by sycodon · · Score: 5, Informative

      Pareto Principle.

      Roughly 80% of the effects come from 20% of the causes. Reddit seems extreme, but it's not unusual.

      Can anyone think of something where this doesn't apply?

      --
      When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    2. Re:1% of the internet.. by gnick · · Score: 4, Funny

      1% of the internet..causes all the drama.

      Bernie would make sure that drama was spread out evenly across the masses.

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
  2. Why do I have the feeling... by iamhassi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The people that did this study are probably part of that 1% group trying to point fingers at other 1% members by blaming them for the drama?

    --
    my karma will be here long after I'm gone
  3. Yes, yes they do qualify as trolls. by fibonacci8 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Reddit discovers internet trolls are a thing.
    Tries to claim they're something new and different this time.
    Usenet, 4chan, et al. not mad, just disappointed.

    --
    Inheritance is the sincerest form of nepotism.
  4. This goes way back by drew_kime · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is at least as old as the British Empire.

    "Hey, let's you and him fight. (While I sit over here actually running everything.)"

    --
    Nope, no sig
  5. Re:Blame by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If they did this for a day or two, it would be the fault of that one percent of the users. After a month or two it would be the fault of the Reddit moderators and owners for putting up with the one percent of the users. After many years, all the remaining users are now to blame for putting up with the Reddit moderators and owners who put up with the one percent of the users.

    I've been a moderator of a few forums over the years (not Reddit). The obvious bad-eggs don't last long, they're easy to isolate and remove. A lot of the problems come from people who like to do the wind-up but they do it subtly. People who do just enough to provoke a conflict (sometimes just stoking the fire and sitting back). They never do one act that by itself is bad enough to get them the boot, but they do lots of winding-up, getting other people to overreact. They are the real problem of most forums, and they're hard to justify booting for a single act. They know what they're doing, and they do it slyly.

    --
    "That's the way to do it" - Punch
  6. Re:Sadly... by gnick · · Score: 4, Funny

    A lot of the conflict on /. is caused by a single username, but not even Anonymous Coward manages 74%.

    --
    He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
  7. Trolls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    These users wouldn't necessarily qualify as trolls or sockpuppets; they're instigators, posting links to other subreddits and encouraging other users to target, harass, and fight with users on that subreddit.

    For those of us old enough to remember what the word "troll" used to mean back in the usenet days, that sounds exactly like what we used to call a troll. Of course now the term has been adopted by the mainstream media, the meaning has changed to mean more someone that causes offence or attacks others.

  8. Re:Alternatively: by GrumpySteen · · Score: 4, Funny

    99% spend all their time in pseudo-intellectual masturbation

    To be fair, at least half of them spend time in the NSFW subreddits engaging in non-intellectual masturbation.

  9. Re:Blame by penandpaper · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ah, true trollery. It's easy to say offensive words. It's art to make others overreact to say them for you.

    Now who is more at fault; the one who "winds-up" a thread or the people who overreact? I know it's the troll but there is a reason you don't feed the trolls.

  10. More hair-trigger reactionaries online? by anvilmark · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think it's indisputable that a small number of people create the majority of chaos in any social circle. However, I've observed an increasing percentage of online participants that cannot ignore anything they disagree with (yes, this is a behavior with a long and glorious tradition https://xkcd.com/386/ ).

    Everyone seems to be so damn serious these days and no incursion against our beliefs can remain unchallenged (exacerbated by the fact that sarcasm is easily missed when it's in written form). The 1% want drama and we give it to them. The oldest counsel is best: Don't Feed The Trolls.

    1. Re:More hair-trigger reactionaries online? by apoc.famine · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I blame social media.

      Social media conditions users to need to respond, because that's how you demonstrate your worth in that medium. Your worth is the number of followers, likes, reposts, etc. How do you not respond in that case?

      Personally, I find myself canceling half the posts I write, on average. I see that bullshit, type a response to it, think about it, and half the time decide that it's not worth arguing with that person. Either they're obviously trying very hard not to get it, obviously trolling, or generally seem incapable of critical thinking. Sometimes I consider if the response would be worth having others read and post it anyway, but sometimes it doesn't seem like a valuable pursuit.

      I see more value in a small number of good posts than a metric fuckton of shitposts.

      That's the opposite of how social media works.

      --
      Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor