# Choice Architecture and the ethics of Discourse
**URL:** https://meta.discourse.org/t/choice-architecture-and-the-ethics-of-discourse/61820
**Category:** Site feedback
**Created:** [4월 29, 2017, 8:28오전 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/choice-architecture-and-the-ethics-of-discourse/61820 "2017-04-29T08:28:34Z")
**Posts on this page:** 5
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@richp10](https://meta.discourse.org/u/richp10)
#### Post date: [4월 29, 2017, 8:28오전 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/choice-architecture-and-the-ethics-of-discourse/61820/1 "2017-04-29T08:28:34Z")
One of the things that most interested me in Discourse was the ‘framing’ of the project as set out by @codinghorror at the outset. He provided both a functional AND ethical case for improving online discussions, through the means of improving forum software. The default ‘Community Rules’ are a terrific exposition of the underlying _values_ and intent of the project. Bravo.
I really like the direction Discourse has gone and there is no intended criticism here at all - but I am not _sure_ there has been sufficient _ongoing_ reflection on how the design choices must continue to reflect the underlying ethical _intent_ of the project.
Over the last year I read ‘Hooked - how to build habit-forming products’ by Nir Eyal and more recently ‘Irresistible’ by Adam Alter. Both of which are excellent and well worth a read. Most of my career has actually been in the field of Addictions so the whole arena of ‘habits’ is of considerable interest; the _ethical_ implications of manipulating choice architecture to bring about behaviour change in others is complicated and I do not think that society has fully worked out where the line is crossed to the _harmful_ exploitation of vulnerabilities (bugs if you will) in the ways human brains function.
This has been percolating - and then I listened to a Sam Harris podcast with Tristan Harris: What is Technology Doing to Us. Tristan was a ‘Design Ethicist’ at Google - I don’t want to get into trying to explain his ideas other than to say I think he absolutely nails it - a genius on the topic if ever there was one.
My proposition is simply that what he has to say on this podcast is important - and it is important to Discourse. What I would like is a civilised (!) discussion here about the implications this has or might have for Discourse. Discourse is an important project - and if the discussion here is positive I propose that @codinghorror invites Tristan Harris to discuss and comment on the choice architecture within Discourse - my guess is that he would be up for it.
Critically I ask that people ONLY participate in the discussion if they have listened to the podcast from beginning to end. It’s a big listen I know, but its a big and important issue!
[https://soundcloud.com/samharrisorg/71-what-is-technology-doing-to](https://soundcloud.com/samharrisorg/71-what-is-technology-doing-to)
---
### Author:  [@scombs](https://meta.discourse.org/u/scombs)
#### Post date: [5월 1, 2017, 12:05오전 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/choice-architecture-and-the-ethics-of-discourse/61820/2 "2017-05-01T00:05:17Z")
Interesting podcast. I definitely think we need a vocabulary to even discuss the ethical issues. At some point it also becomes a legal issue for what gets disclosed in a privacy policy or ad policy for a site.
How about a chart
- X axis is **Disclosed** to **Not Disclosed**
- Y axis is **Not Creepy** to **Creepy**
The magic quadrant of Not Disclosed/Creepy is the biggest problem area. Of course, Discourse is open source so the disclosure part is less problematic.
I think the Discourse team focuses more on good human factor engineering and not letting people do really stupid things either unintentionally, or on purpose, to cause harm. That’s good engineering and ethics.
---
### Author:  [@codinghorror](https://meta.discourse.org/u/codinghorror)
#### Post date: [5월 1, 2017, 12:42오전 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/choice-architecture-and-the-ethics-of-discourse/61820/3 "2017-05-01T00:42:24Z")
Interesting podcast but.. a bit academic and perhaps somewhat over generalized into pure philosophy versus actionable advice. I suggest reading these blog posts if you want proof that I have been thinking about this stuff:
> **[Designing For Evil](https://blog.codinghorror.com/designing-for-evil/)**
>
> Have you ever used Craigslist? It’s an almost entirely free, mostly anonymous classified advertising service which evolved from an early internet phenomenon into a service so powerful it is often accused of single-handedly destroying the newspaper...
> **[Your Community Door](https://blog.codinghorror.com/your-community-door/)**
>
> What are the real world consequences to signing up for a Twitter or Facebook account through Tor and spewing hate toward other human beings?
>
> Facebook reviewed the comment I reported and found it doesn’t violate their Community Standards. – Rob...
> **[They Have To Be Monsters](https://blog.codinghorror.com/they-have-to-be-monsters/)**
>
> Since I started working on Discourse, I spend a lot of time thinking about how software can encourage and nudge people to be more empathetic online. That’s why it’s troubling to read articles like this one:
>
> My brother’s 32nd birthday is today. It’s...
There are about 6-12 more I could link you to but I think this is enough to start with. The narrative here is intentional:
- there is evil
- that evil is often other people
- therefore build a door and know when and how to close it as needed
(For extra special bonus points, recognize that _YOU are going to be the evil in some scenarios_. Yes, you. Me. All of us.)
The above is, in a nutshell, why Discourse exists. Discourse is a spear aimed directly at the heart of Facebook. I don’t often talk about it that way in public, but that’s the truth and that is the long, _long_ term view over several decades: Discourse is the anti-Facebook.
The general design principles reflected in Discourse are:
- above all else encourage (and measure) reading and listening
- provide excellent one click tools and guidance for dealing with trolls, spammers, and bad faith participants
- nudge people to remember their better selves “just in time” at the exact time of temptation
- prevent communities from degenerating over time; build sustainable communities that grow and survive for decades
> **[The “Just In Time” Theory of User Behavior](https://blog.codinghorror.com/the-just-in-time-theory/)**
>
> I’ve long believed that the design of your software has a profound impact on how users behave within your software. But there are two sides to this story:
>
> \* Encouraging the “right” things by making those things intentionally easy to do.
> \*...
> **[Training Your Users](https://blog.codinghorror.com/training-your-users/)**
>
> When it comes to user interface design, I’m no guru, but I do have one golden rule that I always try to follow:
>
> Make the right thing easy to do and the wrong thing awkward to do.
>
> The things you want users to do should be straightforward and clear
> **[Can Software Make You Less Racist?](https://blog.codinghorror.com/can-software-make-you-less-racist/)**
>
> I don’t think we computer geeks appreciate how profoundly the rise of the smartphone, and Facebook, has changed the Internet audience. It’s something that really only happened in the last five years, as smartphones and data plans dropped radically in...
> **[Level One: The Intro Stage](https://blog.codinghorror.com/level-one-the-intro-stage/)**
>
> Way back in 2007, before Stack Overflow was a glint in anyone’s eye, I called software development a collaborative game. And perhaps Stack Overflow was the natural outcome of that initial thought – recasting online software development discussion...
A concrete example of these sorts of nudges in 1.7 and 1.8, a) we added the “get a room” reminder when people respond to the same person over and over in the same topic, and b) we send an encouraging email and award a special badge for two newly arrived users every month whose posts are well-received by the existing community.
As for notifications, the latest work from Dan Ariely says businesses would be well served by batching emails into three periods in the day rather than letting notifications interrupt you all day: morning, after lunch, and end of day.
---
### Author:  [@codinghorror](https://meta.discourse.org/u/codinghorror)
#### Post date: [5월 1, 2017, 1:31오전 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/choice-architecture-and-the-ethics-of-discourse/61820/4 "2017-05-01T01:31:27Z")
The word “Discourse” does naturally occur in the podcast towards the end. About people in power lying.
The segment on VR was very cringeworthy. I skipped that.
---
### Author:  [@tophee](https://meta.discourse.org/u/tophee)
#### Post date: [3월 30, 2018, 7:41오후 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/choice-architecture-and-the-ethics-of-discourse/61820/5 "2018-03-30T19:41:24Z")
Here is the essence of that podcast:
[ ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C74amJRp730)
Nice to see: guess what forum software the new time-well-spent forum is running on…
> **[Humane Tech Community](https://community.humanetech.com/)**
>
> A place to discuss all things regarding the intersection between tech and humanity.