Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Reddit Is Tearing Itself Apart

gizmodo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 130 posts

Re: Reddit Is Tearing Itself Apart

#71

Post by jballanc »

rrggrr wrote: post #50
jballanc wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was curious. So I looked. This was the top non-stickied post I saw: https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/5fltt9/amy_schu... To save others the trouble, the title of the post is "Amy Schumer And Lena Dunham Are Finally Leaving The Country" and the image is of two orca whales being prepared for transport. The very non-coded message is that these two women are "as fat as whales" and furthermore that they deser…

Its a fine line between protecting the oppressed and being oppressive. When you misapply "hate speech" by using it to describe satire, or humor in bad taste, you run the risk of losing the "hate speech" tool to devaluation, blow-back and more satire. Some things deserve a response and others really are best ignored.

Agree completely. Where I have a problem with r/The_Donald is more than any one post, there are patterns that have emerged over time. Hence others calling out "coded hate speech", a concept which I am even more uncomfortable with than "borderline" hate speech.

That said, the very colloquialism they use to refer to the opposition ("cuck") is merely a shortened form of a term ("cuckold") with a very long history of being a base insult with rather heavy connotations of misogyny.

(i.e. Being "cuckolded", a man whose female partner has exhibited infidelity, is taken as a sign of weakness whereas being a woman whose male partner sleeps around is just de rigueur to the point there's not even a special term for it.)

Re: Reddit Is Tearing Itself Apart

#72

Post by throwanem »

jballanc wrote: post #29
leurfete wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I took a look at their sub. I couldn't find any hate speech (though I ignored heavily downvoted comments). I'm also suspicious of "coded hate speech" since that concept grants license to attach racist connotations to just about any sentence. Is there a post on r/The_Donald that stands out to you as being hate speech?

I was curious. So I looked. This was the top non-stickied post I saw: https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/5fltt9/amy_schu... To save others the trouble, the title of the post is "Amy Schumer And Lena Dunham Are Finally Leaving The Country" and the image is of two orca whales being prepared for transport. The very non-coded message is that these two women are "as fat as whales" and furthermore that they deser…

I'm no lawyer either, but I think you are likely to have a very hard time finding someone who is, yet imagines "hate speech" to be a concept with any existence in the law of the United States.

Of all the principles we've ever espoused in this country, we have perhaps been most consistent in our national conviction that the answer to wrong speech is right speech - not less speech but more speech.

That is, until recently. We've lately seen the rise of a strain of thought in which not only is it acceptable to answer mere words - however cruel - with the full and mighty force of law, but to suggest such a course might reasonably inspire trepidation is itself worthy at best of contempt, and the many examples in history of why such trepidation might be justified are ignored in unseemly haste to crush those who speak in a fashion deemed insufficiently satisfactory.

In such a strain of thought, the problem with McCarthyism is not McCarthyism in its own right, but rather that the direction in which it was pointed was wrong - the weapon should not be put down and never picked up again, but merely wielded against a different target than last time.

Is that really the lesson to draw from such an unsavory example? Is there really any practical benefit in such a lesson for the causes such a strain of thought claims so loudly to espouse? The left has fought to silence its opponents for decades, more or less by whatever means fell to hand. The result thus produced, this very month, is remarkable, but not for its loveliness. It will not grow more lovely with time. Does it really seem likely that the tactics which have brought us to such a strait are blameless, and that only more energy is required?

Re: Reddit Is Tearing Itself Apart

#73

Post by GabberBots »

leephillips wrote: post #41
the8472 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the entire internet is composed of private entities. following that logic there is practically no free speech on the internet.

I can exercise my right of free speech on my website. What do you mean?

Your having a website assumes common carrier and net neutrality protections.

Re: Reddit Is Tearing Itself Apart

#74

Post by wheelerwj »

sanswork wrote: post #37
wheelerwj wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You don't have to give every idiot a platform to believe in free speech I mean, technically, you do.

You are welcome to make use of your free speech rights without forcing other people to promote your speech. So no technically you don't.

it's not free speech if you restrict thoughts and ideas. I am not saying reddit is required to be a free speech site, it's not, but you can't be free speech and still censor.

Regardless, reddit claims to be about free speech and still censors. So... irony?

Re: Reddit Is Tearing Itself Apart

#75

Post by greglindahl »

a_bonobo wrote: post #66
greglindahl wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're being sloppy with terms. In the US, obscenity isn't protected by free speech, but non-obscene profanity is. Hate speech? Threats of violence aren't free speech, but a lot of odious hate speech is. Court cases about bullying frequently fail. Of course Reddit, being private, has the right to do whatever it wants. But it's important to realize where the lines are drawn for public discourse.

I don't think harassment via private messages counts as public discourse

I agree. I wasn't talking about private messages in my comment. One nice thing about public discourse is that it's public, i.e., it's easy for everyone to debate how odious it is. Private messages are very different, and should be filtered quite differently.

From a sunlight point of view, being able to make private messages public is quite effective, albeit a feature which should be disclosed in advance.

Re: Reddit Is Tearing Itself Apart

#76

Post by sanswork »

wheelerwj wrote: post #74
sanswork wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are welcome to make use of your free speech rights without forcing other people to promote your speech. So no technically you don't.

it's not free speech if you restrict thoughts and ideas. I am not saying reddit is required to be a free speech site, it's not, but you can't be free speech and still censor. Regardless, reddit claims to be about free speech and still censors. So... irony?

You're not restricting thoughts or ideas you are simply not agreeing to promote it.

Reddit stopped claiming to be about free speech years ago.

Re: Reddit Is Tearing Itself Apart

#77

Post by sanswork »

wallace_f wrote: post #69
sanswork wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a lot of worthless hate speech in the world. Nothing is learned from it except that the speaker is ignorant. The stuff people are taking about blocking and removing from their services is far from the best arguments or adversaries. It is the trash.

Historically speaking, moral righteousness has always been the primary argument for curtailing free speech.

No one is talking about curtailing free speech they are talking about a private platform not wanting to promote that speech anymore.

Re: Reddit Is Tearing Itself Apart

#78

Post by wallace_f »

kyledrake wrote: post #63
the8472 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the entire internet is composed of private entities. following that logic there is practically no free speech on the internet.

Correct. "Free speech" as enshrined in the US Constitution is designed to prevent the government from making laws against free expression. Any interpretation applying "free speech protections" to private entities hosting other private entities on their private property is either ideological, or an intense misunderstanding of the law.

I think reasonable people can agree that technology has paved the way for few exceptions which require special protections to free speech; i.e. Google should not be permitted by law to filter and censor search results for speech, no matter how disagreeable it is to you or the Google CEOs. Edit: In other words, no matter whether I like or dislike the 4chan community, an entire community of various forums such as that should not be filtered by Google.

Re: Reddit Is Tearing Itself Apart

#79

Post by GabberBots »

tux1968 wrote: post #33
sanswork wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was stuff like idiots accusing everyone that didn't support trump of working for CTR that has lead to such a backlash. > sunlight is the best disinfectant What do you think that disinfectant looks like? It is rarely people changing ideas it is more often society excluding people. Which is what is happening here. You don't have to give every idiot a platform to believe in free speech. You don't have to give them an…

I think that Reddit will be throwing away one of its most essential contributions to the internet if it resorts to servicing just one side of this debate. If you're not confronted with the best arguments of your adversaries, you won't understand, learn, or prevail.

> If you're not confronted with the best arguments of your adversaries, you won't understand, learn, or prevail.

That's a very strange defense of a subreddit that had an explicit policy of banning any and all dissenting opinion. Or the vote brigading. Or doxxing, death threats, vandalism, or assault.

T_D was the very antithesis of what you're advocating for throughout this whole thread.

Re: Reddit Is Tearing Itself Apart

#80

Post by sanswork »

tux1968 wrote: post #67
sanswork wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a lot of worthless hate speech in the world. Nothing is learned from it except that the speaker is ignorant. The stuff people are taking about blocking and removing from their services is far from the best arguments or adversaries. It is the trash.

It's hard to be a fair judge when you disagree with someone so deeply. Rather than take the risk of throwing the baby out with the bathwater, it might be prudent to turn this into a teaching moment instead. Teach our side of the isle.. don't engage with idiots.. engage only with well formed arguments. We could learn something and become better people rather than becoming reactionary because we're unequipped to deal w…

I think a lot of people are happy to engage with well formed arguments. And the people that want to make them will continue to not associate themselves with the worst elements of their side of the political spectrum. There are lots of people on the left I refuse to support because of their ideas and comments. So I go out of my way to avoid associating myself with them. If you play in the muck though you're going to get dirty.
Post reply on HN