If a platform can't scale to handle content moderation requests, it shouldn't exist at scale. Presumably a company shouldn't be responsible to respond to bot submissions, and could potentially ban complainants who abuse the system. (Although doing so would potentially open them to legal recourse if they were banning someone for filing legitimate reports they just didn't want to deal with, for example.)

There are reasonable controls that can be put in place, but ultimately, Big Tech companies' responsibility needs to be seated in the legal system, and there needs to be a way to escalate to the legal system when these companies operate in a societally harmful fashion.

"We're just a platform, it's not our fault" should never be a conclusive answer to conversations about these companies' operations.

No human review system can scale to automated reporting; the number of attackers you have is not bounded by your legitimate user base.

The system you describe would basically mean every online service that allows human interaction would always run under risk of any trolls being able to permanently take them down by abusing content moderation requests.

> If a platform can't scale to handle content moderation requests, it shouldn't exist at scale.

Agreed. This whole "we got so big chasing crazy growth that making us responsible for cleaning up our own mess would make us lose money" argument is very tiresome and one that I can't see holding any water outside of tech.

Exactly. There's an exclusive mindset in tech that it's okay to automate human problems and then just say there's nothing they can do when automation isn't adequate. Other businesses have huge percentages of their workforce tackling problems that tech companies just say they're not responsible for, like content moderation, customer service, etc.