Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

EarlG

(23,298 posts)
5. I've become more sympathetic to this position but
Sun Dec 21, 2025, 01:59 PM
Dec 21

I still think that enforcement would be a potential nightmare, at least in terms of writing this into the TOS and making it subject to the Jury system.

I also believe, as Irish_Dem says in this thread, that it is beneficial to see fake information corrected in public.

There may be a way to deal with this which highlights potential misinformation in a way that is consistent with DU's community-based moderating system, but also doesn't ask Jurors to spend their time fact-checking. For example, if we added a rule for "potentially fake information," perhaps instead of sending alerts to a Jury, the system could take note of the number of that type of alert being received on that particular post. If a certain threshold is reached, the post could be automatically labeled as "potentially fake information."

As someone whose job is to consider the downsides of this kind of thing though, I'll also say it might be difficult to calibrate the number of alerts required to trigger the system. Set it too high and it might not be effective enough, but there is probably a lower limit whereby partisan groups could cause mischief when we get to, say, the Democratic primaries which will be kicking off relatively soon. Unlike the regular Jury system, a threshold system would allow people to potentially organize to get real information automatically labeled as suspicious.

So I think there would have to be a manual component where perhaps if the threshold is reached, an alert is sent to someone (Me? Forum Hosts?) for a second look. If the alerts are fair, the "potentially fake information" label could be applied to the post. It could be effective provided that it works to correctly label as much potentially fake information as possible without causing too many false positives. False positives would be a problem because you could end up with too many posts being sent for review. Then there's the issue of how we are defining misinformation/false information/fake content/AI generated content, etc.

That's not to say it couldn't be done -- I'm just thinking aloud really. Bear in mind to pull off something like the above would require a fair amount of time to build out.

Recommendations

12 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Yeah it's odd to me. I'll probably block said DUer Nittersing Dec 21 #1
This message was self-deleted by its author highplainsdem Dec 21 #3
That can make people who do that sort of thing - multiple DUers have, though fortunately it's rare - highplainsdem Dec 21 #4
I think it can be of some benefit to know what the propaganda happens to be. Irish_Dem Dec 21 #2
I agree with Irish Dem's post. First the incorrect post should be clearly tagged in a very conspicuous way. flashman13 Dec 21 #10
Yes this is the point. Irish_Dem Dec 21 #11
"We should never be censors, but should always strive to be educators." MichMan Dec 21 #12
I know that. Way too often it is because someone disagrees with the general DU consensus. flashman13 Dec 21 #25
I've become more sympathetic to this position but EarlG Dec 21 #5
Is it out of the question to have a designated committee for such? littlemissmartypants Dec 21 #7
One great thing about DU is I rarely if ever see fakes go unchallenged. paleotn Dec 21 #9
Not out of the question EarlG Dec 21 #16
I'd rather see critique than policing jmbar2 Dec 21 #21
I agree, I think it would be a mistake to punish people for posting fake news EarlG Dec 21 #24
How hard is it to add a new smilie? littlemissmartypants Dec 22 #29
I find the mention of treating it like copyright violations to be interesting MichMan Dec 21 #27
This message was self-deleted by its author littlemissmartypants Dec 22 #28
I understand, and sympathize. highplainsdem Dec 21 #8
Agree. A post that has been alerted as potentially fake should be highlit erronis Dec 21 #14
And sometimes people post something they didn't know was fake right before they go to bed, and highplainsdem Dec 21 #22
YES: It is beneficial to see fake information corrected in public... SWBTATTReg Dec 21 #6
Thank you - I have wanted this for years obamanut2012 Dec 21 #13
Guard the truth. Good advice. Thanks. twodogsbarking Dec 21 #15
I take it that you are not referring to the posts, increasingly using AI images, which are intended to be humorous. markodochartaigh Dec 21 #17
No, I'm not. I'm talking about serious deepfakes and fake quotes and fake news stories. And they highplainsdem Dec 21 #18
Hurts my ego but necessary SSJVegeta Dec 21 #19
I'm more than fine with this. LudwigPastorius Dec 21 #20
DU is a self policing site. Having been caught myself posting something not factual, I have learned to fact check surfered Dec 21 #23
When I see something that is dubious, I post rzemanfl Dec 21 #26
Latest Discussions»Help & Search»DU Community Help»Since some DUers are occa...»Reply #5