Throwaway Accounts and Moderation on Reddit

TL;DR

This study examines how anonymity via throwaway accounts on Reddit relates to moderation outcomes, using public moderation logs and unremoved content to compare removal rates between throwaway and identified accounts. It finds that throwaway content is more likely to be removed, but removal decisions by humans are generally fair and not disproportionately driven by anonymity; bots account for a notable share of removals, especially for automated actions. The results inform identity policy and moderation strategy, suggesting SMPs should balance privacy with content quality and invest in tools to reduce human moderation costs. Overall, anonymity increases the probability of rule violations being addressed, while maintaining equitable moderation practices and highlighting the importance of scalable, context-aware moderation solutions.

Abstract

Social media platforms (SMPs) facilitate information sharing across varying levels of sensitivity. A crucial design decision for SMP administrators is the platform's identity policy, with some opting for real-name systems while others allow anonymous participation. Content moderation on these platforms is conducted by both humans and automated bots. This paper examines the relationship between anonymity, specifically through the use of ``throwaway'' accounts, and the extent and nature of content moderation on Reddit. Our findings indicate that content originating from anonymous throwaway accounts is more likely to violate rules on Reddit. Thus, they are more likely to be removed by moderation than standard pseudonymous accounts. However, the moderation actions applied to throwaway accounts are consistent with those applied to ordinary accounts, suggesting that the use of anonymous accounts does not necessarily necessitate increased human moderation. We conclude by discussing the implications of these findings for identity policies and content moderation strategies on SMPs.