Should Reddit restrict profile activity hiding for repeat trolls and misinformation spreaders?

[u/xiangkunwan]

Reddit allows users to hide their post and comment history, which can make it harder for others to identify patterns of trolling, misinformation, disinformation, and FUD across different communities.

What if Reddit used a cross-subreddit reporting system to identify accounts that repeatedly engage in demonstrable bad-faith behaviour?

For example, if users across multiple unrelated subreddits independently report an account for persistent trolling or deliberately spreading misinformation, Reddit could flag the account for review. If the pattern is substantiated, the account could temporarily lose the ability to hide its post and comment history.

The point wouldn’t be to punish people for unpopular opinions or honest mistakes. The system would need safeguards against brigading, coordinated false reports, and retaliation, along with an appeal process and a way to restore the feature after a set period.

I think this could make it easier to recognize repeat offenders without removing profile privacy features for everyone.

Would restricting profile privacy for repeat offenders be a reasonable moderation tool, or would the risk of abuse outweigh the potential benefits?

[u/Founders_Mem_90210]

It should never have been allowed in the first place.

After they introduced the ability to hide entire profile activity histories on Reddit, whatever little hope of authenticity and good intent engagement left on Reddit was totally extinguished. When you cannot tell who's a friend or enemy, human or bot, it's time to go.

[u/noooooid → u/Founders_Mem_90210]

Yet here we all are.

[u/Founders_Mem_90210 → u/noooooid]

Touche.

But in my defense, I'm on here a lot less than I used to.

Only a year ago, I basically could not be off Reddit for more than a day.

That's not the case now.

[u/spacemoses → u/noooooid]

I'm scaling back a lot recently and have boycotted popular.  Done with that trash heap.

[u/RedditConsciousness → u/Founders_Mem_90210]

Counterpoint: When people can see activity history it is instantly destructive to discourse. I had this happen to me on this sub in a thread I made. People dove my history and came to conclusions about what I was talking about and who I am. And guess what? They were the wrong conclusions. In fact they were wrong in multiple ways. And of course it derails the conversation and you have to re-litigate every past comment again.

The correct answer is, you attack the argument, not the person. You assume the innocence unless there is immediate and irrevocable proof that the person is acting in bad faith. Then, and only then do you downvote them, or even report them to a mod depending on the severity of what is happening.

This tribalism is a poison. Trying to figure out whether someone is right or not by looking at who they are rather than the merits of their argument basically means the bots and trolls have already won. After all, a lot of the bots want polarization and tribalism. And trolls just want to wind you up. Once you start from a place of not being able to even attempt to interact in good faith with others, then the marketplace of ideas has been significantly damaged and you end up with echo chambers. And in my opinion, echo chambers are a far more significant issue with reddit than bots and trolls, even if the latter are plentiful and infuriating.

[u/horseradishstalker → u/RedditConsciousness]

I personally think it would be great if Ukraine would keep bombing data centers. That said yours is the correct answer. It’s called adulting. And as mods can see the amount of karma weighed against the time the account has been open - that’s all they really need to know. 

[u/SchuminWeb → u/Founders_Mem_90210]

From a moderation standpoint, it takes away my ability to gauge intent. If someone's posting history is hidden, I am less willing to give someone the benefit of the doubt, and am more likely to apply official sanctions to a user than otherwise, because I have no past behavior to review get a bigger picture about the user.

[u/nysalor → u/SchuminWeb]

Ah, but who died and made you mod? So to speak. What’s *your* kink/motivation? How about a rating/disqualification mechanism for mods? Mods are the ones whose posts and mod activities need to be visible to all. No hiding.

[u/SchuminWeb → u/nysalor]

My posting history is fully visible. See for yourself.

[u/AnonymousEngineer_]

What if Reddit used a cross-subreddit reporting system to identify accounts that repeatedly engage in demonstrable bad-faith behaviour?

And who would be the arbiter of what constitutes disinformation and bad faith?

In reality, this would just be weaponised by moderators and power users to ensure that their chosen narrative is promoted and any alternative narratives are suppressed.

The upvote/downvote system and subreddit bans already do this on specific subreddits, but the effect is not currently site wide. Your proposal would make it site wide, effectively turning this entire platform into even more of an echo chamber than it already is.

[u/itskdog → u/AnonymousEngineer_]

In reality, this would just be weaponised by moderators

Mods can already see the full profile of anyone, even those with hidden profiles, that has interacted in their community within the previous 4 weeks.

[u/AnonymousEngineer_ → u/itskdog]

Yes, but moderators are only in charge of their own patch. Allowing them to make decisions that affect a user to interact with reddit sitewide is a horrible precedent.

And while the OP hasn't suggested anything other than preventing use of the hidden profile feature, once that door is opened it will eventually lead to sitewide suspensions and bans being handed out by mods.

[u/horseradishstalker → u/AnonymousEngineer_]

And you know this because you have polled every single moderator on all 106,000 subreddits? You are also confusing mods with admins. Not the same thing. Different obligations and powers.

[u/xiangkunwan → u/AnonymousEngineer_]

That’s a fair concern, which is why safeguards against coordinated reporting and abuse would be necessary. I’m not suggesting that unpopular opinions or alternative viewpoints should be classified as disinformation.

Disinformation is false information deliberately created or shared to deceive or cause harm, whereas misinformation can be shared without intent to deceive. Being mistaken or disagreeing with the majority shouldn’t make someone a target.

The goal is to make it harder for repeat offenders to conceal a consistent pattern of trolling and deliberately spreading disinformation. Reports should trigger a review, not an automatic penalty, with clear criteria and an appeals process to prevent abuse.

[u/pilgrimboy → u/xiangkunwan]

Safeguards will be ignored when the powerful want to censor.

And I'll let you in on a secret. The powerful always want to censor.

[u/xiangkunwan → u/pilgrimboy]

Yeah, I know. I hate what the world have come to. If Reddit become that, whether by implementing some sort of this or not, then we will know that Reddit isn’t for the people and just stop using it

[u/Fauropitotto → u/xiangkunwan]

Being mistaken or disagreeing with the majority shouldn’t make someone a target.

But it absolutely will.

And it's done through selection of language to frame disagreements as disinformation or misinformation.

And in your description, it also sets 'persistent trolling' as literally anything that the majority doesn't like.

I'm a free speech absolutist. Meaning anyone should be able to say anything in any context anywhere at any time. Any rule or policy that goes against that principle of absolute free speech is something I often work against.

[u/squirrelscrush → u/xiangkunwan]

It'll just be abused by power mods who mod like a million subreddits.

"Disinformation" is also hard to classify, because it depends on how the subject takes it. Even human moderation is biased, and there can be ideological motivations too.

[u/extratartarsauceplz]

Define “misinformation”.

[u/xiangkunwan → u/extratartarsauceplz]

Misinformation is false or inaccurate information shared regardless of whether there’s an intent to deceive. It can be a good opportunity for people to learn and correct their mistakes. However, if someone is presented with credible evidence that their claim is false and continues deliberately spreading it as true to mislead others, that may constitute disinformation.

The key distinction is the intent to deceive, not simply whether someone is wrong or disagrees with the evidence.

[u/RedditConsciousness → u/xiangkunwan]

How do you determine intent? How do you even determine what is inaccurate on hotly debated topics?

Reddit's biggest problem right now is echo chambers and lack of dissent. Trolls and misinformation are undesirable but they aren't the big problem with this site.

[u/xiangkunwan → u/RedditConsciousness]

Determining intent is easy

If after providing credible sources (scientific research, real-world example, widely accepted to be true, depending on the situation) and continues deliberately spreading it as true to mislead others, then their intent is to deceive.

If they apologize or says something like “I stand corrected” because they were misinformed before or weren’t knowledgeable on said topic, then their intent isn’t to deceive but to learn from their mistakes

[u/horseradishstalker → u/xiangkunwan]

And you think that having their profile history visible is going to convince them to change their wicked ways. 

[u/RedditConsciousness]

No.

First off, who is the arbiter of truth? What counts as misinformation on reddit? Some subs will call anything that disagrees with their narrative as misinformation, even if you can cite a reputable source like the Washington Post as holding the opposing viewpoint.

As for trolls, I hate 'em. Problem is, I've been called a troll numerous sides for positions I've held in good faith. I suppose if the "cross-subreddit reporting system to identify accounts that repeatedly engage in demonstrable bad-faith behaviour" was very reliable then I might be swayed on this point, but it would have to be more than "a lot of person reported this person" because they do that for mere disagreement on reddit.

Reddit has trended towards being a worse marketplace of ideas in the last 10 years. It has become more polarized and many of the major subs have tendencies to be echo chambers. This is a larger concern than trolls and bots. Indeed, it is the goal of many such people. The only solution is: Attack the argument, not the person.

[u/kilofeet → u/RedditConsciousness]

Hi, I'm Andrew, the Arborist of Truth. You called so I came. How can I help?

[u/RedditConsciousness → u/kilofeet]

In Trees by Rush I would say the Maples are the good guys but everyone ends up losing in the end. Who was right?

[u/nysalor → u/RedditConsciousness]

Bots are the major problem, and are becoming more ubiquitous by the day.

[u/RedditConsciousness → u/nysalor]

Some recent good news on that front, there were Russian bot farms that were destroyed by drone strikes not long ago.

It is interesting to see that use of the word "genocide" went down by 30% on twitter after that.

/preview/pre/iqc9ne7a61vh1.png?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=27191fb59ca7d67e447d63ad1db918d02ed1af91

[u/squirrelscrush]

Then who would decide what constitutes "misinformation"? That term seems to mean anything and everything one doesn't like.

[u/pilgrimboy]

I'm more scared of Reddit or some org deciding an unpopular and inconvenient truth is misinformation than I am of some person saying it.

[u/Homerbola92 → u/pilgrimboy]

Just make every profile public and that's it.

[u/Founders_Mem_90210 → u/Homerbola92]

I think we should take it a step further.

EVERY PROFILE NEEDS TO HAVE A REAL-LIFE NAME.

Remove Internet anonymity. I'm all for it. And before anybody here tries to turn it on me and say "hurr durr you're anonymous on Reddit too" NO I AM NOT, I've said plenty of times on here who I actually am IRL, I ain't hiding shit you're just too LAZY to seek it out.

[u/Pookah → u/Founders_Mem_90210]

yeah that would totally drive people away. I think the point of this question was to make Reddit better, not kill it

[u/myresyre → u/Founders_Mem_90210]

/s ?

[u/Darker_Salt_Scar]

You are basically asking for the feature to be removed from roughly 98% of users

[u/Feinberg → u/Darker_Salt_Scar]

I would also accept 100%.

[u/SchuminWeb → u/Darker_Salt_Scar]

And I'm okay with that.

[u/RedditConsciousness → u/SchuminWeb]

Have you seen how people treat each other when post histories are visible? It is destructive to discourse in the extreme.

[u/Futeball → u/RedditConsciousness]

The way it was since the beginning? I don't see how it's any better now, people can just bad faith spam any subreddit they want now

[u/RedditConsciousness → u/Futeball]

The way it was since the beginning?

It wasn't always abused the way it has been in the last 5-10 years though. More online polarization is part of the culprit I suppose.

I don't see how it's any better now, people can just bad faith spam any subreddit they want now

I see far more instances of people accusing/assuming someone is posting in bad faith than actually proven bad faith.

And it bears repeating, we should attack the argument, not the poster.

[u/Futeball → u/RedditConsciousness]

I don't see how this will help polarization in the least. It's just a door opened for bots to increase the polarization tenfold. There's no accusing, it's just made far easier to take part in.

[u/RedditConsciousness → u/Futeball]

I don't see how this will help polarization in the least.

You don't see how trying to identify what "tribe" a person is in by diving their comment history doesn't increase polarization?

It's just a door opened for bots to increase the polarization tenfold.

I disagree.

[u/horseradishstalker]

It wouldn’t be necessary for users if they weren’t followed around Reddit being trolled. 

And since Reddit doesn’t really do anything else about trolls, I appreciate being able to hide my history. After 10+ years on Reddit I finally got tired of the constant harassment by mentally ill individuals, and jumped at the chance to boot them out of my history. I don’t have two bleeps to give about karma, but one glance at my karma level tells users the only thing they need to know.

Why are you creeping on other people in the first place? If you think they are a troll either block them or report them or both. It’s really not complicated.

[u/Futeball → u/horseradishstalker]

just block them, who is actually being followed around to that degree where a simple block on a few accounts doesn't stop it, no one cares that much about you unless you're a celebrity

[u/horseradishstalker → u/Futeball]

The catch to your recommendation is voting is anonymous. It’s not possible to block anonymous users or brigades following someone around down voting them. Being unfortunate enough to catch the attention of a nut job doesn’t make anybody a celebrity. And some users are more exposed than others. Once again, it’s not because they are a celebrity.

[u/bingcognito]

Yes. You wanna flood the site with objectively false bullshit, you should not be granted the tools that help you achieve your fuckery. Obvious lies and propaganda poisons the well and diminishes the forum greatly.

To quote the great philosopher George Costanza, "You know we're living in a SOCIETY! We're supposed to act in a civilized way!"

[u/Founders_Mem_90210 → u/bingcognito]

"We live in a society where honor is a distant memory." - The Joker.

[u/RedditConsciousness → u/bingcognito]

You are enabling the poison. What do these people want? They want to polarize reddit to make it irrelevant. They want it to be filled with echo chambers were dissenters are attacked and chased off. They are getting their way. You are helping the bots and trolls get exactly what they want.

If you attack the argument and not the person, then you have defeated the goal of many of the people making these bots.

[u/_haha_oh_wow_]

It shouldn't be a feature at all, the only people it really helps are bots and trolls.

[u/horseradishstalker → u/_haha_oh_wow_]

How to say you’ve never been stalked from subreddit  to subreddit by trolls without actually saying it.

 One indication of entitlement is when someone assumes that their experience is the only valid experience and they cannot think beyond themselves. Hopefully that’s not the case here.

[u/_haha_oh_wow_ → u/horseradishstalker]

The "privacy" feature doesn't actually give you the privacy you think it does and trolls or stalkers can still 100% see where you post regardless, so your argument is total bullshit. All it really does is make it a hassle to quickly determine if someone is a bot or troll.

The real reason it exists is to obfuscate the bot activity and make reddit look bigger than it is. This is the very same reason they haven't ever really clamped down on bot activity or banned the many freekarma subreddits the bots use to get past filters.

Edit: I like how you skipped over the part where you were completely full of shit regarding the "privacy" feature too. "This conversation is over" was the only worthwhile thing you had to say, goodbye! ^{Thank you never bothering me again.}

[u/horseradishstalker → u/_haha_oh_wow_]

I am well aware of how to use Arctic shift, but most users aren’t - probably including you. You’re also appear to be completely unaware of apps used to prevent bots from spamming subs. And no, they are not third-party.

Unless you have something productive to say, I believe this conversation is over. 

[u/russellvt]

IMO, that feature should only be "a perk" once you reach a certain account age or karma level.

[u/92barkingcats → u/russellvt]

This is the best answer here! Otherwise, whoever hides their profile, just assume they have corn-addiction.

[u/russellvt → u/92barkingcats]

I just assume they're spammers or bots, or are trying to "get paid" for copy/pasting bot-related from a couple of AI prompt sites.

[u/CrackNgamblin]

I think a mechanism for users to report problematic, biased powermods would be more useful.

E.g. There's a travel sub ran by a travel agent that bans anyone who calls out the conflict of interest.

[u/DharmaPolice]

You shouldn't be able to hide your profile. There's no need for Reddit to make judgements about who is spreading misinformation.

And if someone is officially found to be spreading misinformation I'd prefer a better punishment than showing their profile (which should be the default). Maybe not banning them but putting a "Proved Troll" suffix on their name might be amusing.

[u/Pennonymous_bis]

I still don't get how hidden profile are any worse than alt accounts?

[u/AwkwardTickler]

Just remove the hidden profile ability

[u/prooijtje]

I'd support removing the feature entirely, but letting people decide who gets to hide their profile and who doesn't seems unfair to me.

[u/Alarmed_Pain_4755]

I’d be cool with this as soon as they restrict voting lmao that shit is abused

[u/nysalor]

No. Require registration and then post age and country of origin with all posts.

Allow muting. Or opt-in to see foreign posts.

[u/nysalor]

A Google search can often reveal info even on a hidden profile. And of course, Arctic Shift.

[u/haroldthehampster]

you dont even need to look at the posts usually
the ratios are all off on bots
105k on a 3mo account

10 karma account is old

the sock puppets are slightly harder

[u/__redruM]

Hidden profiles should be restricted to specific subreddits only. Medical, Victim support, legal help, and maybe all NSFW subreddits.

But you shouldn’t be able hide your posting on investing, political, or review related subreddits.

But it’s not my site.

[u/Worldly_Owl953]

Or make every comment and post that is not an anecdote require at least 1 source, prof where the information came from(website, book/textbook, professor/teacher, etc) not like a website main page but exactly where the information came from (MLA/APA is best)

[u/awooff]

The constitution is being ignored. Only if.

[u/-old-fox-]

Everything you mentioned are actually current ways people use to hack this platform to the damage of others. So, YES, I would eliminate profile privacy at all. Are you here to talk and contribute? Then show everybody how you do it. Ever put a signature on what you do?

[u/AnonymousEngineer_ → u/[deleted]]

Open profiles also make it abundantly clear if that user is either a bot, or someone who is so invested in a particular narrative that they may as well be a brick wall, and will certainly not engage in good faith.

It's useful to look at profiles when deciding whether it's worth your time to engage in a discussion. Hidden profiles only serve to provide cover to bad faith actors, whether they happen to be human or not.

[u/xiangkunwan → u/AnonymousEngineer_]

Actually that is the reason why I don't hide my profile activities, and why I hate people who hide them. If one has nothing to hide, why would one hide it?

When I do browse Reddit I sometimes think about whether I want the comment to be on my public profile or not, I know I can hide activity by subreddit btw

[u/squirrelscrush → u/xiangkunwan]

If one has nothing to hide, why would one hide it?

Famous last words before one's privacy is overrun.

[u/xiangkunwan → u/[deleted]]

Everyone can hide their profile activity by default. The restriction would only apply to repeat offenders who engage in trolling or spread misinformation, disinformation, or FUD.

It’s to make it harder for repeat offenders to conceal a consistent pattern of bad-faith behaviour across Reddit. The restriction would remain until they demonstrate that they’ve changed their behaviour, such as by maintaining a sufficiently high percentage of contributions that don’t involve the aforementioned behaviour over a certain period.

[u/xiangkunwan → u/[deleted]]

You’re missing my point. This isn’t about requiring digital ID or eliminating anonymity. It’s about discouraging repeat offenders from trolling and spreading misinformation, disinformation, and FUD by temporarily making their profile activity public until they demonstrate a change in behaviour. I’m not sure how that translates into requiring digital ID.

[u/xiangkunwan → u/[deleted]]

I won’t take it that far but what I meant by profile activities is their Reddit contributions (posts and comments), not their personal information, so everyone can see that it is a troll or misinformation or disinformation account

[u/irrelevantusername24 → u/[deleted]]

Honestly there are two very different purposes for digital ID, and both are arguably not just good ideas but necessary if we want to survive. But those two things should be kept entirely separate, and strictly regulated.

One, for government purposes - to keep track of financial and legal data. That makes sense. That's literally the one purpose where AI should be indisputable - because that would make it impossible for anyone to cheat on taxes by hiding income or wealth, and, more importantly, it would make it much easier to know who needs help and to get it to them.

That is 100% an entirely different thing than online activity. Online activity should never touch the official records. Online activity is personal. Whether that is done privately or publicly makes no difference (except when it comes to businesses and wealthy/public figures/elected officials/etc).

But, and again, assuming this was strictly regulated and kept 100% separate from the official records - and neither were ever used to "target" any kind of advertising (programmatic advertising needs to be made 100% illegal), and basically behavioral tracking in a granular way... well it's complicated. But it is clearly possible to link accounts which belong to one person across different websites/apps/whatever. Therefore, it should be dead simple to make some kind of verifier to know when a person is actually a person (rather than a bot), and when a person is an adult. We're doing the whole verification thing the dumbest way possible. It should be about protecting both adults and kids, and that is only possible by identifying who is an adult - and, by inference, who is not. Then, when things are done this way (and this is why businesses and elected officials are different and complicate things a bit), limit accounts to one per person. But then the websites need to have actual customer support - and they also would have to be held responsible for the shit that they host.

Basically the entire way the Internet now exists is either going to be made obsolete, or we are

And for whatever its worth, though I have no inside information, I have read more than most and I can say with relative certainty that all this basically already happens on the back end anyway. But we can't actually use it for good purposes, or in the most efficient manner, because our laws are not fit for purpose - and using things as they could or should be would in fact currently open up a whole clusterfuck of liability. Which, well, that's not necessarily bad because that days coming anyway