AMA about my darkest secrets

Okay here's a dark secret question: Can Super Mods and Admins see user's IP addresses if they have multiple accounts? Can you see the main account of a throwaway? Edit: I don't know what a super mod is either guys, I just figured there were Mods then there were MODS!!!

Why are power mods still allowed, you know the ones, they lord over 100-300 subs squatting and waiting for them to become relevant...and then they promptly treat listnookors like garbage? Visit /r/MakingAMurderer sometime, one just absolutely destroyed it. They all had to flee to another sub /r/TickTockManitowoc. (Another example reached the [front page](https://www.listnook.com/r/AdviceAnimals/comments/4m8kii/the_inmates_are_truly_running_the_asylum/) yesterday.) This is an all too common practice and I don't understand why this type of behavior is allowed? Why are we allowing power mods to exist? Edit: Hey Spez, [look](https://www.listnook.com/r/announcements/comments/4megfw/ama_about_my_darkest_secrets/d3uw68h), one of the very I guys I was talking about turned up. Here's your chance to see for yourself and give us some sort of answer on the issue.

What's the best and worst thing about running Listnook?

Anything new you can tell us about privacy on listnook?

Quite a few people were concerned by [your recent comments](https://www.listnook.com/r/videos/comments/4lmfmj/ceo_of_listnook_steve_huffman_about_advertising_on/) to which the title of this post alludes ("We know all of your interests. Not only just your interests you are willing to declare publicly on Facebook - we know your dark secrets, we know everything"), and would like further explanation. Are your comments representative of the policies of listnook Inc.? Does this herald the implementation of highly targeted advertising based on sublistnook preferences, or perhaps something much more sinister, like mass data collection which could then be sold on? I think if you could clarify these comments it might put people slightly more at ease.

Do you ever think about unbanning every single user just to see the chaos it would create?

Hi Steve, I think the last one of these I inquired about the on-boarding process for new user accounts. Has that made its way into the timetable yet? I'd like to once again emphasize my belief that a thorough introduction to the site, its philosophies, how it works, and the actual nature of sublistnooks as independent communities will cut out SO many issues faced by both users and moderators. An effective presentation to first-time users could really solve a lot of little issues that we frequently see compound into larger ones. Regardless of the answer, thanks for taking time to do another of these. They're always interesting and informative.

What is your biggest regret in life?

Ever thought of buying RES and integrating it into the main site so that the vanilla listnook experience is actually worthwhile?

Do you think you guys are making as much progress as you had hoped? What areas and ideas are you really happy with, and which do you feel still need more work?

Even though you are an Admin what do you enjoy most about Listnook as a User? Sorry for the kinda vague question.

When will m.listnook.com be not horrible and useless, and what was the impetus to change it from not horrible and useless to horrible and useless originally?

How do you feel about the default sublistnooks?

why do you have all our secrets? - what did you mean by that statement?

Could you talk more in depth about the decision to conspicuously replace links to various vendor sites with listnook affiliated versions to increase site revenue without the user being aware?

I'll ask the obligatory question: 2fa when?

[deleted]

When do you expect more mod tools to become available?

Do you think listnook will still be relevant in 10 years from now?

Whats your listnook password?

1. What do you think makes listnook different to other social media sites out there? 2. Batman vs 100 badgers, who wins?

Is a hotdog a sandwhich? What about a taco? Sharks or Penguins? Warriors or Cavs?

[deleted]

[removed]

Do you like pineapple on your pizza?

Do you like pina coladas?

What was the real reason Victoria was let go?

Can you tell us why this was removed from listnook's core values? >1. Respect anonymity and privacy >You are not required to share more than you are comfortable with. Having information doesn't give you a license to use it. Allow people to be as anonymous as they choose, including ourselves. Value the candor afforded by anonymity. See https://np.listnook.com/r/videos/comments/4lmfmj/ceo_of_listnook_steve_huffman_about_advertising_on/d3olvco

There has been a noticeable trend of moderators in very large subs (and apparently smaller subs moderated by people with a distinct conflict of interest that is NOT made clear to the casual visitor) not really moderating them as much as directing the discussion in a way that suits their personal beliefs. Now on most subs this would not be an issue, /r/Pokemon should be positives about Pokémon, /r/conservitive and /r/liberal positive about conservative and liberal values respectively. This makes sense as it is the point of the sub. The types of subs where this would end up becoming an issue are ones that would appear to the layperson to be an impartial sub, for example /r/news, /r/worldnews, or /r/politics. On the surface and in the way they are described, these subs should not take a stance one way or the other. (Edit: In addition to the large subs trying to appear impartial, subs for products, companies, people, etc, especially when a potential conflict of interest is in play, or unwritten/ambiguous rules are enforced to steer the conversation are also effected) Given some of the recent developments regarding Facebook and their curating/censorship/tweaking of their trending topics, do you feel that social media outlets have a duty to provide an impartial service to their patrons? Or, as in the case with targeted subs, at least make it clear that things are only being presented with information from one perspective? **EDIT** I have another example that I noticed because of a good question from /u/MK101 that would be directly impacted by better rules regarding transparency and fulfilling the implied duty that a sub and it's mods have to listnookors. The sub /r/lootcrate is devoted to the popular nerd subscription box of the same name. Their rules include your basics, no spoilers on box content before a certain date, no NSFW, how to post spoilers after the blackout date, and two more i want to point out, no posting or discussing other subscription boxes, and Mods have the last say on what is allowed, the sub is not Lootcrate customer service, they will delete content to promote using the proper customer service channels. >No posting or discussing other subscription boxes. This sort of makes sense, and sort of doesn't. It is a sub for fans to discuss Lootcrate, right? A common thing in many subs is to discuss recommendations regarding other products, services, or advice on things not covered explicitly by that sub (even if it is just in the comments and not a dedicated post). This makes sense, you want advice from people that you know have like interests and experiences, right? Otherwise it may as well just be the product comment section on the official website, right? A sub dedicated to /r/Halo may have suggestions about similar games to play during a delay and /r/Diablo3 may have a submission asking for similar games but with offline play. Hell, /r/oculus decided that the best way to serve their constituent listnookors was to flat out open up discussion to ALL forms of VR tech. This is how you take what would have just been a circle jerk and turn it into a real community. That makes it a bit weird to ban any community discussion on topics other than Lootcrate... >Mods have the final say on what is, and is not allowed. Can you imagine if that was how the police determined whether you broke the law or not? Get pulled over by a cop for having a sticker for his kid's school's rival on your car is illegal on this street on Tuesdays. Why? He said so, and he has the final say. They do say that the reason that they are going to delete many posts is to encourage listnookors to take their comments to the customer service department as the sub is not the service department. Ok, this sort of makes sense to remind people that the sub is not official and customer service is often the best route, but many subs have realized that the higher level of accountability and visibility of product reps actively participating in the community is a very good thing for nearly all vendors. /r/vaping is a great example of awesome involvement from the companies discussed. Not only are listnookors warned of potential pitfalls, but they also get to see that company's customer service first hand. It's win win right? Not to /r/lootcrate. Why would someone set up a sub to discuss something, then limit the discussion to only positive commentary? There is no fulfilling conversation there, so why? Well, it turns out the why is because the top mod is an employee of Lootcrate making it an official corporate sub run by the corporation. A fact that you would not know by looking at the sub because it is never mentioned. This means that any listnookor doing research to see if this service is for them will see that sub and nothing but glowing reviews. Since they have a general trust in the listnook system of group verification, that must mean this is an awesome box if no one has anything bad to say. [It is especially awesome that they definitely did not send out a faulty product like, oh, let's just say an Infinity Gauntlet oven mitt that was melting and potentially hurting people. That would surely be brought up on the sub right? Well, I see no posts about it, so it must be good to go.](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CjUMviPXEAAXhTF.jpg) At least it seems that the sub finally started allowing posts regarding the recall of the product they sent out, but they certainly censored initial report on the potential of people being hurt and their product melting. These are the self serving mods with rules designed to benefit themselves at the cost of listnookors that I think need to be evaluated. Also keep in mind, that according to current Listnook policy, it is totally OK for Lootcrate to moderate the sub devoted to them and set the rules using paid employees as the moderators. If, however, I was the person that was the top mod and set identical rules in regards to posting and conduct in the sub and accepted a free subscription to Lootcrate for doing so, I would be permanently banned for accepting a kickback. Make this transparent for the sake of the listnookors. If you are moderating a sub about yourself, your product, or your company, ESPECIALLY if you receive any sort of compensation for it, that should be clear for transparency, integrity, and (I did not think it would be this serious) safety. If your rule is to delete all negative feedback, post it clearly in the sidebar. Do not hide it behind a catchall mods have the last word clause. We are not asking for any huge changes to Listnook. We are not even asking mods to enforce new rules, or stop enforcing old ones. All we request is that they clearly list what their rules are and if they have involvement that could conflict with the best interests of listnookors. **Edit**: To those who expressed a skeptical outlook on whether this issue would be addressed, rest easy. An Admin did weigh in regarding the subject in another top comment chain. The issue is not being avoided, but it is one that will take time, discussion, and finesse to address in a way that will provide positive change regarding integrity of the site and transparency, without overstepping and moving censorship from behind to curtain to being official policy. It is also important that if any policy changes are made, they do not compromise the things that make Listnook great, like leaving nearly all control to the mods who can then tailor their subs to best serve their community in content, tone, and message.

How do you feel about staff of particular companies being mods in the the relevant sublistnook? Mods in /r/lootcrate, who work for the company, have been deleting posts about a dangerous fault with their product (melting oven glove) and now there has even been a recall issued. How is it acceptable to endanger people in this way? It seems like a massive conflict of interest. Especially since there was drama recently about mods being paid on behalf of companies behind the scenes, how is this any different? More info: https://www.listnook.com/r/lootcratespoilers/comments/4lu55v/psa_possible_infinity_gauntlet_oven_mitt_safety/ Edit: Now they admit it was actually company policy to delete the 'offending' posts, mind boggling: >Why posts were removed: >Our social team was advised to remove posts due to us sending out an official message via our own owned channels to anyone who received the oven mitt with further info. The e-mail gave them more information on how to proceed. We are currently investigating and taking appropriate action to to resolve. https://www.listnook.com/r/lootcrate/comments/4mbl1b/official_infinity_gauntlet_recall_emails_are/d3uu75p

Hey /u/spez Do you mind answering [this question](https://www.listnook.com/r/AskListnook/comments/9clji/where_did_my_post_about_searscoms_urlhackable/c0c98im?context=1) now? You told us to check back with you in a few months. I think 6 years is sufficient time. Here is the History for those that don't remember the glorious [F*** Sears Incident](https://www.listnook.com/r/TheBookofListnook/comments/h3pm9/i_history_the_fuck_sears_fiasco/). I am still interested in the real story behind this and think it fits perfectly in the "darkest secrets" thread. Also interested in what entities or corporations (if any) have that kind of power over listnook today and could actually get a post taken down globally.

As a CSS mod on /r/StevenUniverse, I very much dislike the push towards m.listnook.com, mainly because of the spoiler problem. Obviously we don't want to restrict discussion of new episodes of the show, but we simultaneously want to keep the experience "pure" for those who haven't watched, giving users an option to avoid spoilers while still enjoying the sublistnook's content. Our solution has been to completely ban NSFW content and reskin the tag as a Spoiler tag. This has a couple consequences, the main ones being: 1. If you have NSFW posts hidden you won't see spoiler posts. 2. If users look at m.listnook.com this reskinning is disabled. 3. Sublistnooks that want to do this must completely ban NSFW posts, since you cannot tag a post as both NSFW and spoilers, and you can't just leave NSFW posts or spoilers unflagged. I would love for moderators to have the ability to enable spoiler tagging on sublistnooks to make the experience more consistent and keep people from PMing us asking why our sub is filled with NSFW tagged posts. This is a concern for many TV show sublistnooks, and in fact many sublistnooks that center on content that can be spoiled (like comic books or movies). Do you have any word on when these problems may be addressed?

Reaching out to the Admins for stuff has been incredibly hit or miss. I've reported seriously abusive users through /r/listnook.com and never gotten a response, and then brought minor matters up and heard back very quickly. I also recently detailed by issues with your [AMA support](https://www.listnook.com/r/ModSupport/comments/4hgxqk/does_anyone_actually_monitor_amadatalistnookcom_or/), and while publicly complaining *did* solve my immediate issue, /u/krispykrackers is gone, and that is no guarantee things are actually getting better. I know that there was recently a few new hires, but could you go into a bit more detail on how the Admin team is working to improve its ability to interact with mods and assist them in what they need?

There's obviously been some controversy about your statements about [knowing listnookors' darkest secrets](https://www.listnook.com/r/videos/comments/4lmfmj/ceo_of_listnook_steve_huffman_about_advertising_on/). While I expect a certain amount of tracking and/or ads going on on free sites, the alarmist response over such a vague statement in somewhat expected. I think people (including myself) would appreciate some transparency on how our information is being used: * What information is collected? * What is it used for? * Who is it made available to? * How securely is it stored? * To what degree is it scrubbed and/or anonymised?

Here's one: r/tattoos is moderated by a complete jerk, who violates every rule the sub is supposed to hold itself to, is rude and hostile to posters, and who delivers a perma-ban at the drop of a hat and with absolutely no recourse. I've been banned for over a year, because I had the misfortune of being cursed at by another poster and quoted his statements to me in a subsequent post, as an example of how NOT to behave. That poster and I made up, said nice things about each other, and all was well - until the ban-hammer from the main mod on that sub. Who, when I inquired about the potential of lifting the ban, proceeded to berate me with the same language that I DIDN'T EVER USE that got be banned in the first place. More than once. I've been in contact with other mods, and while they are sympathetic, they are apparently so afraid of the guy that they won't cross him or, in the one time one tried to defend me, buck his absolute rule. What gives with that, and what do you think you can do about it?

Do you have any plans to revise the sublistnook request function? Right now, I'm trying to get a sublistnook that was created after my name (/r/JaguarGator9) and was created by /u/Ragwort, who created the sublistnook 5 months ago and has done absolutely nothing with it. It should be noted that Ragwort has created over 800+ sublistnooks named after other Listnookors that he has done nothing with. However, because he's technically active, the request by the bot was denied. Any plans to change this so that it requires that a mod be active on that particular sublistnook in 30 days, and not just on Listnook?

[deleted]

Can we have a mod removal "mutiny" button for when a mod is out of control and fighting the rest of the team? So far from what I understand you can't remove a mod without them being inactive. I've seen people talking about this issue before. Sometimes you think you have the right person for the team and you just really really don't.

are you guys gonna do anything about the new algorithm? Breaking news like shootings still take an hour to get to the top of /r/all also, /r/all/top is pretty much frozen in time because of the new algorithm. I want to see it change over time like many others

[deleted]

What's your guys policy on payed actors on listnook? Things like Putin bots, that Hillary pac that was paying people to "correct" internet message boards. Do they fall under the spam / payed advertising policy? Or are they allowed since they aren't directly selling things? Do you have methods of tracking that kind of activity?

Why do you allow certain subs to ban people who post on one sublistnook from so many others? I don't browse much on this account except p***, but if I posted in the gamer gate sub, even posting that I disagree with what they say, I would get banned from like 30 subs without any interaction with them. I mean, seriously, what the f***? How is that allowed?