Live data from Hacker News

Reddit is still in turmoil

techcrunch.com

421–430 of 521 posts

Re: Reddit is still in turmoil

#421

Reddit is a crossroads: It's an intersection between the cultures of 4chan (which is in itself an intersection of japanese and american sensibilities), and the culture of usenet, and internet forums, and a dozen other cultures besides. None of these cultures handle censorship well. They all originated in an environment where, to some extent, you could say whatever the hell you like. Many of Reddit's early users came…

The problem is that reddit is trying to be both a neutral platform and a cohesive community at the same time. No one gets mad at phpBB when someone deploys a forum with an objectionable theme because it's understood that they had no involvement, they just provided the code for anyone and everyone to use in accordance with a FOSS license. reddit tried to do that with hosted subreddits, but it also tried to cross-polli…

/r/the_donald had the "sheriff star" still displayed several days after it hit the media.

It's such thinly veiled hate speech. The tone of the denials hint to those who are anti-semitic that this will be their platform from which to indulge in their hatred.

Even a decade ago, no large corporate forum would put up with this sort of liability. It's crazy.

Re: Reddit is still in turmoil

#422
It seems like the tribe that built the site and the tribe that is trying to run it now are not the same thing. The culture of reddit is not civilized, equal, or any of the other HR type directives they are going to try and make.

If the people in charge now tried to start reddit back then, with all the focus on fairness, equality, correctness, and inclusiveness reddit would never exist.

It would be something else. I'm not sure it would be bigger, smaller, better, or worse, but I know it wouldn't be reddit.

You can't have a bunch of "bros" build a popular site and then pretend that they didn't. You can't bring in a bunch of nerds into a community and then kick them out and take it away from them once it's popular and successful.

Actually you can try and do those things, but it won't work because the tribe will reject you and go somewhere else. It happened to slashdot, it happened to digg, it will happen to reddit and Hacker News too.

If you don't understand the tribe, you can't hope to lead them. You don't lead the tribe by pretending it's not what it is.

Reddit's owners and operators seem to be ashamed by their tribe. That is going to be their downfall.

Re: Reddit is still in turmoil

#423
post #416
post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This strategy backfired immensely when the Donald Trump subreddit ended up being the only one reporting on the news. Say what you will about republicans, but they often end up being the biggest defenders of constitutional rights. Democrats on the other hand (aka "progressives") are always looking for ways to limit constitutional rights in order to create a "safer society" and stable "social climate". Just look at E…

Speaking as a progressive, that's because most of us consider the US Constitution to be a means, rather than an end unto itself. We tend to make a strong distinction between Natural and Legal Rights[1] and to group the Constitution into the latter category. And Legal Rights are useful only insofar as they align with the underlying Natural Rights they support (i.e. life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness). Our con…

> We tend to make a strong distinction between Natural and Legal Rights[1] and to group the Constitution into the latter category

The framers debated the inclusion of the Bill of Rights in the US Constitution for the simple fact that enumerating the rights made them appear though they were "granted" or in your words "Legal Rights." Furthermore, just by entertaining the idea that they should be explicitly enumerated, called into question whether they were "inalienable". However, they fully believed that those first ten amendments were "Natural Rights". In the end, they felt that enumerating them worthy, and given how the amendments are treated/respected/discussed and the litigous environment today - I'm glad they did.

Re: Reddit is still in turmoil

#424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Give a cut of advertising revenue to the mods of successful, high quality subs. No, oh no. Why mods? Cuts should go to users posting the content. Maybe make it so that OC is rewarded [more], karma "farming" is discouraged, echo chambers don't become the only places with activity, and make sure that hiveminds do not drown out all other discussion. Otherwise Reddit just becomes the online cousin of mainstream media,…

Mods are one of the reasons why the site is dying. Huge threads and valuable posts are constantly being deleted because a mod sees a few worthless comments and nukes everything instead of letting the community use the built-in vote mechanism to push these posts to the bottom of the site.

The current trend seems to be a mod locking a controversial thread and commenting 'some of the comments are unacceptable and we don't have time to babysit this'.

Which annoys everyone who didn't leave an unsavory comment and also begs the question - if you aren't into babysitting threads then what did you expect the role of a mod to actually be, and if there aren't enough mods why not get more?

Re: Reddit is still in turmoil

#425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It goes to what kind of company and site you want to have. If all you have is 20-something tech bros then that's the kind of company and site you will have. If you want to appeal beyond that, you may want to broaden your culture. Sometimes the founding cultural DNA is too strong, or attempts to change the culture fall short for a variety of reasons.

I don't think hiring women or blacks is going to do much to the community.

No, but if your monoculture of tech-bros has not had to deal with half the internet shit that women and people of color do (Or have, for various reasons, not been deeply impacted by it,) then what you're going to get is a community where women and people of color are driven away.

I've never been stalked on the internet. I've never received threatening phone calls. I've never been personally harassed, or physically threatened. If by some happenstance, one or two people did any of the above, I'd probably laugh it off.

A company full of people like me is unlikely to consider those use cases as seriously as they should.

Re: Reddit is still in turmoil

#426
post #309
post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you ask us to compare between two examples, you are required to provide two actual examples instead of having us just imagine a scenario that fits your claim.

They are probably talking about Milo Yiannopoulos being permanently banned from twitter.

Every "permaban" like this is an opportunity to get a famous person on a distributed Twitter competitor like GNU Social (especially if the ban actually lasts). If you work on one you may want to contact him. People whose presence is objectionable to Twitter are the natural early adopters for distributed social networks.

Re: Reddit is still in turmoil

#427

I think much of Reddit's problems with its userbase boil down to an early failure to manage expectations. It's pretty clear that the Reddit corporation doesn't want Reddit to be an anything-goes, absolute free speech zone with no moderation or anti-harassment policies -- but that's what the site actually was for many years. Now, when the company cracks down, users think their freedoms are being curtailed. The mistake…

But they very much did want it to be an anything-goes community when it started out. Anything that would raise their user counts. Now that the site is big and successful, they need to retroactively curtail the unsavory bits if they're to have any hope of selling the site for a big pay day.

I think it's important that an actual, "say what you want as long as it's not illegal" site exists. A lot of the polarization in this country is due to both sides isolating themselves from the other 100% of the way.

Such a site needs to exist somewhere. Now do I necessarily want that on Reddit or Twitter? I don't know. I'm extremely left-wing ('90s liberal; so pro free-speech over political correctness); and honestly Milo's tweets were appalling whenever some people I knew there would retweet him. I won't miss seeing a gay person defending a VP that supports conversion therapy.

But I can clearly see that there's a liberal slant going on in these moderation policies. And I can imagine being on a site where the opposite were true, and know that I wouldn't like that very much myself. For that matter, there's another bias when it comes to celebrity status. I would bet good money that there is absolutely nothing Trump could say that would get Twitter to ban his account or remove his mark, even though he's in the extreme right. He's exempt from the rules that nobodies like us have to follow.

What I'd rather see Reddit/Twitter working on are better tools to defend against harassment. I've had to write my own Greasemonkey scripts to filter out certain types of attacks, and I'm not even remotely relevant. I can't imagine how someone famous, let alone someone famous who can't code their own Javascript filters, can use these sites. And well, I think we saw the results of that lack of control over harassment with the Ghostbusters actress.

But these scripts aren't hard to make. Give people the ability to filter out tweets that contain certain phrases from people you don't follow. Give them the ability to temporarily block all new notifications from people they don't follow for a few days after someone sics their followers upon them. Etc, etc. All very easy stuff to make.

Re: Reddit is still in turmoil

#428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> much of Reddit's problems with its userbase boil down to a failure to manage. Removed some words to make this statement more accurate. Reddit itself doesn't manage the communities, and that's a problem because the Thought Police are now doing it for them. The idea that people should be allowed to create and manage their own communities is nice in theory, but why should Xx_JoeSchmoe123_xX be in control of the larges…

> Reddit itself doesn't manage the communities... That used to be true. But they've been stepping in and trying to clean up speech they don't like. As soon as you take on the responsibility of cleaning up one group, you take on the responsibility for every group. And reddit just doesn't have the manpower to do it.

Nor do they have a consistent and rational policy to do it, which is why things aren't going very well.

Re: Reddit is still in turmoil

#429
post #423
post #416

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Speaking as a progressive, that's because most of us consider the US Constitution to be a means, rather than an end unto itself. We tend to make a strong distinction between Natural and Legal Rights[1] and to group the Constitution into the latter category. And Legal Rights are useful only insofar as they align with the underlying Natural Rights they support (i.e. life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness). Our con…

> We tend to make a strong distinction between Natural and Legal Rights[1] and to group the Constitution into the latter category The framers debated the inclusion of the Bill of Rights in the US Constitution for the simple fact that enumerating the rights made them appear though they were "granted" or in your words "Legal Rights." Furthermore, just by entertaining the idea that they should be explicitly enumerated,…

Yes, the framers did debate whether to include the Bill of Rights, but my understanding is that their fear was that by enumerating some rights it would delegitimize those that were not enumerated. That's why we have a (mostly ignored) tenth amendment.

Plus the Bill of Rights aren't quite Natural rights as I understand them. Half the Bill of Rights (plus the 13th and 14th amendments) are about setting up a Legal Right to a somewhat complex and specific trial by jury system. But you don't actually have a Natural Right to participation in that exact system. You do have a Natural Right to just and fair treatment from your government, even when accused of a crime, and a jury trial is a very good way (though not necessarily the only good way, nor the absolute best way) to formalize that right.

On the other hand, I believe I have a Natural Right to bodily autonomy. If I want to surgically change my gender, or have sex with another consenting adult, or ingest a mind-altering substance with full knowledge of the side effects, then that's my right and the Government should have an extremely high bar to clear in order to prevent me from doing so. However, the fact that these rights are not enumerated in the Constitution has historically been a huge barrier to having them respected, which indicates to me that the framers fears were well founded.

Re: Reddit is still in turmoil

#430

I think much of Reddit's problems with its userbase boil down to an early failure to manage expectations. It's pretty clear that the Reddit corporation doesn't want Reddit to be an anything-goes, absolute free speech zone with no moderation or anti-harassment policies -- but that's what the site actually was for many years. Now, when the company cracks down, users think their freedoms are being curtailed. The mistake…

> much of Reddit's problems with its userbase boil down to a failure to manage. Removed some words to make this statement more accurate. Reddit itself doesn't manage the communities, and that's a problem because the Thought Police are now doing it for them. The idea that people should be allowed to create and manage their own communities is nice in theory, but why should Xx_JoeSchmoe123_xX be in control of the larges…

It's an interesting point, I can imagine reddit being a platform for Gen Y politicians once subreddits are forced to elect their moderators.
Post reply on HN