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

251–260 of 298 posts

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

#251

Post by sneak »

threatofrain wrote: post #246
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.

Anything by association is part of reality and I'm not sure how people are supposed to negotiate with that. If you march with a KKK rally, are you associated with the KKK now? Also, presumably not everything the KKK does is bad. Is it wrong that people in the KKK are all lumped together? These are all questions of guilt by association, no?

Loading a webpage is not a show of support for the operators of that webpage.

I have in the past loaded Gab, 8chan, and Facebook in my browser. Am I “linked to” the users of those platforms that have committed mass murder?

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

#252

Post by belltaco »

seoulmetro wrote: post #248
rimunroe wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Asking yourself why you were mentioned is not at all the same thing as taking responsibility. If a mass shooter mentioned how much they appreciated me, my work, or a group I ran (or was even in) I'd be concerned and would wonder why. That seems like a perfectly healthy response.

Actually that's the opposite of a healthy response. There's no reason to investigate why someone likes something unless it played an active role in the thing that is being investigated. Asking yourself why Joe Dirt liked listening to your podcast about cats and listed it on his BAD THING manifesto is truly at the polar opposite end of what normal people would do. They would definitely not feel concerned that he liste…

>I bet a lot of people like doughnuts. Just because they might write that in something when they get infamous does not make a doughnut shop question their actions.

Are you seriously implying that hanging out and posting on 8chan,Voat, or alt-right subs is similar to eating doughnuts when it comes to race motivated mass shootings? Even with just the raw probability numbers it's off by many orders of magnitude.

Eating doughnuts for breakfast and committing murder is a random co-incidence, are you implying it was completely a random coincidence that those kind of sites show up repeatedly as hang out spots in mass hate killings?

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

#253

Post by jessaustin »

resters wrote: post #49
baalimago wrote: post #20

The 'frontpage of the internet' is actively taking control of the subreddit of a presidential candidate, in an election year. I know that HN is highly against Trump, and probably cheer for this decision, but how is this not a democratic issue?

HN is actually surprisingly pro-Trump. I have been shocked at the broad support for economic nationalism (trade protectionism, etc.) from HN participants, as well as the chorus of agreement with Trump's anti-China stance.

It's not a surprise. The war media has conditioned Americans to mistrust other nations and nationalities. Trump happens to agree with the dominant narrative with respect to China. So of course lots of news consumers agree with him, with respect to China.

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

#254

Post by OrgNet »

Bozzz wrote: post #186
swebs wrote: post #151

So I tried to visit https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/ to see what the fuss is about, but apparently Reddit wants me to jump through hoops to give them my email to even be able to view it. Is there any archive site or whatever that will let me view this subreddit without giving reddit my personal information?

AFAIK, when you make a reddit account it asks you for your email, but you can just leave that field blank.

They only make it look like your email address is required... black pattern by Reddit...

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

#255

Post by s_y_n_t_a_x »

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.

> You're still spinning it unfairly

> It was a pranking attempt that fell flat

You're spinning, not them.

Even assuming it was a "prank", it was meant to create discord, otherwise the CEO would have chose a different, funnier, more obvious edit.

Instead, he chose to make a subtle change and then only admitted it after getting caught.

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

#256

Post by aclarry »

sneak wrote: post #251
threatofrain wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anything by association is part of reality and I'm not sure how people are supposed to negotiate with that. If you march with a KKK rally, are you associated with the KKK now? Also, presumably not everything the KKK does is bad. Is it wrong that people in the KKK are all lumped together? These are all questions of guilt by association, no?

Loading a webpage is not a show of support for the operators of that webpage. I have in the past loaded Gab, 8chan, and Facebook in my browser. Am I “linked to” the users of those platforms that have committed mass murder?

No, not if you "loaded in the past". But if you have recently engaged positively with it, sure.

Plus that's kind of two degrees removed from the original comment. If someone who does a horrible thing cites a community as a motivation/inspiration, yeah that group should absolutely at least think about what that says about them. It's not an immediate condemnation of guilt, but if there's strong evidence that that community's behaviour or ideology provided motivation, or if there's a repeated pattern, then it's a problem. The alternative is to say there's nothing wrong with white supremacists because all those people who commit racial violence citing white supremacy are just incidentally related, or that there's nothing wrong with gangs because we should avoid "linking" people who commit gang violence to their associates.

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

#257

Post by s_y_n_t_a_x »

sixstringtheory wrote: post #214
dx87 wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm continually amazed at how many people believe that "free speech" didn't exist before the 1st amendment was added to the constitution of the USA.

What’s your point? That because in theory you might have been able to say something without losing your head before the US constitution existed, that suddenly we should apply constraints meant only for the government to private entities or citizens? Seems like a non sequitur to me.

It's funny how pro-capitalistic people get here when this comes up.

Everyone here is big government, anti-censorship, pro-speech, pro-decentralization, anti-corporation UNTIL conservatives are targeted.

As a conservative (libertarian) yes, legally speaking they can do whatever they want, but morally speaking, it's fucked up.

Ironic the quote below now applies to the opposite side.

----

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out — Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out — Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out — Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me — and there was no one left to speak for me.

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

#258

Post by sadfsdafsaasdfd »

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/26/us/bloomberg-anti-semitis...

It wasn't photoshopped...

So you're one example was you mistakenly thinking something was racist when really it was the actual content that Bloomberg chose.

That's how sensitive you are.

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

#259

Post by sadfsdafsaasdfd »

throwaway122378 wrote: post #131
CriticalCathed wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disturbing? I don't think so. I subscribe to the_donald because I want to keep up with what the nutters are saying. Yesterday I reported a post where they had photshopped out the dots in the " i "s in all of Mike Bloomberg's ads and replaced them with the star of david. That's just yesterday. And just one post that caught my eye. And it was one of the top posts of the day with thousands and thousands of votes and hun…

I’m a Jew and saw that Bloomberg post. So what. It bothered me but I got over it. Freedom of speech covers things that you may not agree with.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/26/us/bloomberg-anti-semitis...

It wasn't photoshopped.

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

#260

Post by throwawayrepub »

It's not photoshopped, you're just sensitive.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/26/us/bloomberg-anti-semitis...

Your one example is wrong. Maybe you have the wrong idea of the other side?

Maybe your bias blinds your judgement and you hate what you don't understand?

Certainly seems that way.

Post reply on HN