Absolutely agree. I used to like to check /r/all for a more rounded view -- but I don't get that anymore. And apparently they're planning to move toward more location-specific view -- which will only make the problem worse.
It's not an easy problem to solve, I guess. I think Google is trying to make some inroads with Google News? But even then once you start personalizing the content, you're only going to see sources you like.
I'm not sure how that's a problem. Presumably I like the sources I deem to be of a certain quality. I don't want to see the stuff I don't like because it's probably not at the standard of quality I expect.
The reason nobody's solved the "moderation" problem is because it's the wrong abstraction or the wrong problem to solve. The problem to solve is how to make filtering and discovery better.
Maybe a Babel Fish, only for politics instead of language.
The question might be: do we really want to understand each other? Or straight to fisticuffs?
I don't regard myself as especially enlightened, I think that's another kind of trap, I think most of us just zone in and out of consciousness and 90% of this belongs to the lizard brain.
I suspect most moderators conflate centrism with non-bias or neutrality - but the real reason why the job is so difficult is precisely because sometimes the extremists are correct. Simply reining in the excesses of the left and right isn't enough.
I've said before: if a delay of several seconds was inserted into submissions to politically sensitive topics, that would help reduce # of death threats, name calling.
If it's any consolation the Internet has proven people have big mouths and fundamentally just can not be bothered to obtain genuine pitchforks.
It's not an easy problem to solve, I guess. I think Google is trying to make some inroads with Google News? But even then once you start personalizing the content, you're only going to see sources you like.