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

Reddit purges 1/2 of The Donald’s moderators – replaces them with approved mods

reclaimthenet.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 298 posts

Re: Reddit purges 1/2 of The Donald’s moderators – replaces them with approved mods

#221

Post by smsm42 »

pjc50 wrote: post #202
sneak wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The users of that forum have literally been linked to public shootings. I dislike that subreddit as much as anyone, but that’s guilt by peaceful association and can be leveled at a lot of different websites, video games, and political parties. Let’s not go there.

> can be leveled at a lot of different websites, video games, and political parties. Everyone - every signle website, author, pundit, politician, etc who finds themselves mentioned favourably in a mass shooter manifesto should at least ask themselves how they got there and what has gone wrong with their messaging. There may not be anything they can do, but a lot of places seem to think that hate never leads to action…

Nope they shouldn't. Nobody owes anything to anybody because some random wacko liked something they once said or did.

And even if you think they should, it's neither yours nor Reddit's business to enforce it.

Re: Reddit purges 1/2 of The Donald’s moderators – replaces them with approved mods

#222

Post by derision »

charwalker wrote: post #194
morley wrote: post #47

It's ironic that this publication is ostensibly anti-censorship. One of the few things I know about this subreddit is how quick they were to delete posts and ban commenters that didn't fit in with their worldview.

Similary the conservative subreddit has a rule stating it is not a debate platform and dissent or debate will be removed. It's an echo chamber of self-victimization that probably sees the Youtube case earlier this week on first amendment application as both a win for private companies and a loss of what they consider their right to free speech.

The same echo chambers exist on the left. I was banned almost immediately from the Bernie subreddit for asking why he's running on a platform of getting money out of politics while at the same time being the most aggressive campaign when it comes to requesting donations. The "I am once again asking for your financial support" meme perfectly captures this.

Re: Reddit purges 1/2 of The Donald’s moderators – replaces them with approved mods

#223

Post by ALittleLight »

wtallis wrote: post #211
ALittleLight wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just googled it and it seems like he changed messages that were insulting him to insult moderators of the subreddit. The parent's comment doesn't seem wrong to me, if that's true. He altered communications of reddit users to make it look like they were insulting reddit moderators, in such a way as to falsely attribute those insults to the original authors.

You're still spinning it unfairly, by leaving out relevant information. It was a pranking attempt that fell flat, and was neither intended to nor successful in having the effect of surreptitiously turning T_D users against each other. The admin in question quickly admitted to the deed and explained his motives. Attributing other, conflicting motives without further justification is misleading at best.

It's interesting that you believe you can interpret the motives of others (it was just a prank!) But you object to other people's interpretations. And what a coincidence, your interpretations align with your prior beliefs.

Regardless, I think the facts are clear - reddit administrators altered the communication of users such that they appeared to be insulting the moderators of their subreddit. You think it was a "prank". Others think it was malicious. That difference of opinion over the facts doesn't justify your accusations against the parent comment in my opinion.

Re: Reddit purges 1/2 of The Donald’s moderators – replaces them with approved mods

#224

Post by derision »

CriticalCathed wrote: post #102
eanzenberg wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You may try linking to the content next time.

Why, are you accusing me of lying?

I frequent the Donald daily, and have never seen any anti semitic content. And I browse /new as well

Re: Reddit purges 1/2 of The Donald’s moderators – replaces them with approved mods

#225

Post by T-hawk »

ehsankia wrote: post #127
T-hawk wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Simply upvoting posts (that don't break any rules) in quarantined subreddits does not get you punished. The problem is that parenthetical, and determining it. Users were told that upvoting rule-breaking posts would risk a sitewide ban, without being told what content it was or what rules it broke . Reddit says it gets to punish users by declaring any content "bad", by arbitrary or overly broad or even unspecified r…

> Users were told that upvoting rule-breaking posts would risk a sitewide ban The consequences are very gradual, starting with warnings, then going up to temporary and eventually permanent ban. So it won't come out of nowhere, you will have plenty of change to adjust your behavior. > Reddit gets to declare any content "bad" by arbitrary or overly broad or even unspecified rules. That's the uproar. Not really, they ha…

https://www.redditinc.com/policies/content-policy

That's Reddit's content policy, and it's not precise at all. Pretty much anything can be deemed to fall under "threatens, harasses, or bullies" if it speaks against any group or opinion whatsoever. And the enforcement has been entirely selective and biased, targeting conservative subreddits and supporters, while "eat the rich" type posts are celebrated.

Right, Reddit is a private platform and can choose to host or not any content it wants. I don't think anyone is disputing that. We can still wish Reddit would choose to act in favor of free speech and openness rather than choosing to deplatform opinions that fall on the unpopular side.

Re: Reddit purges 1/2 of The Donald’s moderators – replaces them with approved mods

#226

Post by sdinsn »

craftyguy wrote: post #73
sdinsn wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm American. I don't know anybody, not a single soul, that uses Whatsapp.

..and "hacker" "news" continues to march towards conflating anecdotes with general trends/statistics. You are 1 American, not all Americans. Just because you don't know anyone doesn't mean there isn't anyone.

Which is why I was quite clear and specific when I said: "I don't know anybody". I encourage you to read more carefully in the future.

Re: Reddit purges 1/2 of The Donald’s moderators – replaces them with approved mods

#227

Post by viklove »

beloch wrote: post #177

Reddit has become highly successful as a political discussion forum for people from pretty much every part of the spectrum, but the moderation is utterly opaque. Even relatively centrist subreddits, such as /r/Canada, have mods who ignore the published moderation rules of their own subreddit and do what they please. If they don't like a thread or post it just disappears, even if it violated no rule. Reddit's moderati…

This is a huge problem with popular discussion platforms. Users have no oversight over moderator action, and forums are run like fiefdoms. This can be a real problem when these forums grow to 100k+ users, and moderators abuse their power for person gain or just to stroke their own egos.

I'm going to shamelessly plug my own discussion platform https://plebia.io, where there is total oversight over all moderator action (a record of deleted posts and banned users), and users can actually change the rules of their forums and replace moderators through a voting system. If your mod is absent or abusive, you now have a mechanism to replace them with someone who is better.

Forums should work best for their users, not their moderators, and most importantly, not their advertisers (basing a discussion platform on ad revenue never ends well, which is why Plebia will never run ads of any kind).

Re: Reddit purges 1/2 of The Donald’s moderators – replaces them with approved mods

#228

Post by fuck_u_pjc50 »

pjc50 wrote: post #202
sneak wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The users of that forum have literally been linked to public shootings. I dislike that subreddit as much as anyone, but that’s guilt by peaceful association and can be leveled at a lot of different websites, video games, and political parties. Let’s not go there.

> can be leveled at a lot of different websites, video games, and political parties. Everyone - every signle website, author, pundit, politician, etc who finds themselves mentioned favourably in a mass shooter manifesto should at least ask themselves how they got there and what has gone wrong with their messaging. There may not be anything they can do, but a lot of places seem to think that hate never leads to action…

Are you kidding me?

This is like saying J.D. Salinger should have taken responsibility for John Lennon's death. Any looney toon on the block can reinterpret someone else's words to validate their insane desire to shoot up a Dairy Queen because they got the toppings wrong on their ice cream.

Re: Reddit purges 1/2 of The Donald’s moderators – replaces them with approved mods

#229

Post by belltaco »

defertoreptar wrote: post #118
ehsankia wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Correct me if I'm wrong and I read it wrong, but I think you're mixing up things here. > Users that have more than 500 karma in quarantined subreddits outside of The Donald will not be allowed on the list of approved applicants [to be a moderator] This is only for being a moderator. Simply upvoting posts (that don't break any rules) in quarantined subreddits does not get you punished. > If the content that people are…

> This is only for being a moderator. Simply upvoting posts (that don't break any rules) in quarantined subreddits does not get you punished. That was a requirement given for being a new mod at /r/the_donald. There is also a separate, new rule change revealed in the recent "Transparency Report" that says that users who consistently upvote rule-breaking content will be banned. > The whole point of a quarantine is exac…

>Then in 2016 we saw massive Bernie Sanders support to a swift and sudden change to Hillary Clinton support. That was followed by the "Correct the Record" movement and then later "Share Blue." These were all coordinated efforts to inorganically promote one political party and suppress another.

I see this claim often, and having been a Reddit user from back when there no comments and no subreddits, I can tell you what you're claiming is not remotely the most plausible option.

Right from the beginning Reddit swings left wing and libertarian, their first preference is someone like Ron Paul and Sanders. That's why you see competing candidates demonized, and those candidates idolized. They don't like the mainstream GOP at all.

The sudden swift that you're talking about happened it was clear that Sanders would lose the primaries and after he conceded the race, and told his supporters to support Clinton. Reddit didn't like Clinton in 2008 and in 2016, but they would take her any day over Trump or any other GOP candidate except Ron Paul.

Why would you expect Reddit to keep supporting Sanders after he conceded the race? Who would that help? That would help Trump. That's why a lot of right wingers including Russian trolls encouraged making Sanders supporters angry to suppress turnout. That's why you saw the massive shift after the primary because that sub on Reddit does not like Trump at all and would even have Clinton over Trump. Think of the typical Sanders or Warren supporter, would they support Trump or Clinton as President?

All these complaints about Shareblue and CTR are just noise, and what T_D and conspiracy subs convinced a bunch of people was happening.

Why couldn't CTR or Shareblue suppress Sanders support and chime up Clinton support on Reddit before Sanders gave up? The Sanders sub was regularly multiple times in r/all and Clinton support and subs weren't popular at all even in r/politics. If they were so powerful, why can't SB or CTR suppress Sanders support over the past few months when he has become a viable candidate?

No one can give a straight answer, because there isn't one, yet they are absolutely convinced of their version of events. It's the modern day version of an urban legend given how many people believe in the narrative you posted.

Post reply on HN