[mehrdadn]

Ask them why the exposed moderators who now live in constant fear for their lives in their own countries were not offered serious compensation that could last them a significant chunk of their lifetimes (which would be on the order of hundreds of thousands of dollars). [1] Facebook will most likely respond that their threat assessments didn't warrant it. To which you'd ideally respond by asking them why a reasonable victim should consider it fair or reasonable to be forced to trust Facebook's security chops when Facebook already failed him once and put his life in danger.

Seriously, it's ludicrous to offer just a "home alarm system" and a ride to work (which I also assume is to their current job... why the hell should they keep doing the same job?) for a moderator who's now going to be in perpetual fear of getting killed. Those people may well no longer be able to work like they used to, for any employer.

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/jun/16/facebook-...

[ryanlol]

I really don’t think this is as credible of a threat as you paint it to be.

Terrorists don’t go around killing people for banning them from forums.

[cjaybo]

This is such a strange response. First of all, Facebook's inability to keep their moderators' identities private is an issue regardless of how the terrorists respond.

> Terrorists don't go around killing people for banning them from forums.

It seems incredibly arrogant to assume that you know what terrorists will and will not do (especially when used as a rebuttal to someone expressing concern for real people who have been put in this situation).

I don't have any experience interacting with terrorists, but growing up in a poor education system in the southeastern U.S., I've witnessed my fair share of gang activity. I have seen incredible confrontation/violence erupt as a consequence of amazingly trivial actions.

It does not seem far fetched to me that an extremist group would possess the potential to respond dispraportionately to a perceived act of disrespect or aggression. Given the circumstances, it's hard to find a charitable interpretation of why you would suggest otherwise.

[ryanlol]

>First of all, Facebook's inability to keep their moderators' identities private is an issue

Agreed, but it’s not an issue because they’re going to get killed by terrorists. I’m objecting to the dishonest framing, not trying to argue that this isn’t an issue.

>It seems incredibly arrogant to assume that you know what terrorists will and will not do

Your assumptions seem at least as arrogant.

>I don't have any experience interacting with terrorists

I do

[klez]

>>I don't have any experience interacting with terrorists

>I do

Is it something you're at liberty or willing to talk about? Cause I'm intrigued.

[ryanlol]

I used to know this kid called Junaid, at some point he was relatively normal. He became less and less normal though, and eventually got in trouble with the law over some silly hacks. He fled the UK to Syria and joined ISIS.

In Syria I watched him wave around guns on skype for a couple of years until he was placed at the top of the US kill list and eventually got incinerated.

[wbronitsky]

Why are you continuing to hammer away with the Reddit style comments? You might have a good point, but now you are acting like an argumentative ass.

This isn't some sort of internet pissing contest with people you don't know and will never meet; that is literally any other online forum that I've seen. This is a forum to discuss issues with people who are interested in them. You are purposefully diluting the conversation, and for what? The lolz?

Go somewhere else with this crap

[dang]

Please don't cross into personal attack here. We ban accounts that do that, as you know, but we don't want to ban you.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

[ryanlol]

How come so much of your comment history consists of complaining about “reddit comments”?

I’m not an argumentative ass because my opinion differs from yours, that’s all in your head.

[mehrdadn]

Credible or not, you need to compensate for the fact that you've terrified someone for the rest of their lives and made them understandably fearful of making a living.

[ryanlol]

Presumably it’s some reporter and not facebook doing the terrifying.

>made them understandably fearful of making a living

These fb moderators have much less to fear than a factory worker, taxi driver or a convenience store clerk.

The fb mods are vastly more likely to be killed in a traffic accident on their commute than to get targeted by terrorists because they banned someone.

How should such a fundamentally unreasonable fear be compensated? Seems to me that it’d be enough to just offer counseling to distressed employees.

[mehrdadn]

Whether or not a threat is credible is a different thing from whether or not the fear resulting from it is reasonable.

[ryanlol]

I know. I just don’t see anyone spending much time worrying about random store clerks vastly more reasonable fear of getting robbed.

This is kinda like being scared of a plane crashing on top of you, sure it’s possible and a scary thought, but ...

[mehrdadn]

No it's not. Your example is not reasonable. The fear of a plane landing on top of you is pretty generic, and the risks are well-known and well-understood to who work closer to planes. The one here is quite reasonable, entirely a result of Facebook screwing up, and not something that's supposed to come with the job the way it did. I outlined these for you and completeness's sake, but they should have been fairly obvious, so I'm not going to entertain more unreasonable comparisons.

[rock_hard]

Source?

[en-us]

It's linked on the bottom of the post.

[C14L]

He worked in an anti-terrorism unit at Facebook under his real-name Facebook account?

Well, I don't know what to say...

[chatmasta]

To be clear, he was required to use his real Facebook account. From the article:

> The moderator said that when he started, he was given just two weeks training and was required to use his personal Facebook account to log into the social media giant’s moderation system.

This seems like reckless endangerment to me.