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

Discord bans r/WallStreetBets server, subreddit went private for a while

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 1001 posts

Re: Discord bans r/WallStreetBets server, subreddit went private for a while

#171

Post by lizardking »

BoorishBears wrote: post #69
qqn wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thought crossed my mind too, but if so then why?

I joined and had an extremely negative experience immediately, left, and reported it. This was months ago. Imagine suddenly thousands of people are doing this and now Discord is being flooded with reports. - Something some people might not know as well, there was another WSB Discord started by Jartek that used to be linked on the subreddit That Discord was much more tame even with minimal moderation. No racial or hom…

Did you consider maybe just letting people enjoy things that aren’t for you instead?

Re: Discord bans r/WallStreetBets server, subreddit went private for a while

#172

Post by luxuryballs »

madeofpalk wrote: post #99
sickygnar wrote: post #60

Someone likely paid the platforms and/or admins to take them down

Did you're read the article, and the statement Discord put out? I think the stated reason is the believable. > Discord says it did not ban the server for financial fraud — rather, it was banned because it continued to allow “hateful and discriminatory content after repeated warnings.”

You can take almost any discord down for this, and they often do if it gets reported enough times. In this case it got enough attention so they enforced the rules.

Re: Discord bans r/WallStreetBets server, subreddit went private for a while

#173

Post by epistasis »

koolba wrote: post #77
epistasis wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think anybody has ever suffered negative regulatory action for doing a short squeeze. Even Martin Shkreli didn't get in trouble for his.

Acting alone it’s not inherently illegal. Real question is whether pooling your strength (ie assets) with others to force a squeeze is illegal collusion and market manipulation.

In particular, it's hard to see a short squeeze as market manipulation, which is why nobody has been penalized for it.

What is a hedge fund except more explicit coordination of many people's money on a much greater scale? The classic example of Porsche's squeeze on VW stock was Porsche's management coordinating many people's pooled assets.

Re: Discord bans r/WallStreetBets server, subreddit went private for a while

#174

Post by crocodiletears »

WhompingWindows wrote: post #165
crocodiletears wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IIRC, The American revolution was coordinated and funded by the existing colonial administrations, with aid from France. It was a secessionist movement backed by regional business interests in response to a reassertion of imperial sovereignty by a previously lax British government. Something to be proud of, certainly. But not a grassroots thing, even if it did have some degree of popular support.

Calling it a secessionist movement isn't an apt characterization, which in US history calls to mind the Southerners' attempt to Secede from the USA. The revolutionaries, rather, considered themselves a number of independent colonies, coming together in opposition to British rule, where they were lacking in representation. They would not see themselves as "part" of Britain in a way the Southerners clearly were part of…

Absolutely right.

Re: Discord bans r/WallStreetBets server, subreddit went private for a while

#175

Post by llampx »

disgrunt wrote: post #145
lawnchair_larry wrote: post #50

Ridiculous. Can’t believe we’re raising a generation of such fragile people. The WSB banter is pretty tame, if not pretty juvenile. Who cares. Don’t join the chat if you don’t enjoy their company. That’s the route I took.

This has nothing to do with the banter and everything to do with who's ox is being gored in the short squeeze.

Exactly. Anyone can see through the mealy-mouthed ban explanation.

Re: Discord bans r/WallStreetBets server, subreddit went private for a while

#176

Post by luxuryballs »

madeofpalk wrote: post #158
scarmig wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think at this point every single unpopular or questionable action made by an institution is going to go with a "it's to prevent hate/discrimination" justification. It's an easy way to get a credulous mob on your side; you can always nutpick random examples; and if someone argues against it they just prove they're one of the racists/whatever.

I mean your comment is based on the assumption that hate speech doesn't happen online. in my experience, places like discord and a bunch of subreddits are sweltering with it. it is not surprising at all that something that blew up as fast as this had trouble moderating hate speech out and became a host for it.

I think he’s saying you don’t ban the entire room just because some of the people say naughty words. And also why is someone deciding for me how much risk I can take? Just let me be exposed to hateful speech, I think I can handle it, and if not I can leave. It’s not like they can argue that hearing bad language will overflow their hospital and thus I must be on lockdown just in case.

Re: Discord bans r/WallStreetBets server, subreddit went private for a while

#177

Post by disgrunt »

mrtksn wrote: post #133
ve55 wrote: post #14

And they chose today as the best possible time to enact this ban? Really? I really think they should have put more thought into the timing of this decision; a lot of users are going to be upset and will suddenly start to realize that a single company has a monopoly on their online social life (this may seem like an exaggeration, but it feels quite true to me colloquially, especially if you're a younger US male and/or…

See, the problem is that people are doing all this because they believe that it doesn’t matter. These are not idealists or indoctrinated revolutionaries. No one is going to do anything if it’s not going to bring lulz or cash quickly because nothing matters anyway. All the anti establishment movement is nihilistic in its core. These are not Eastern European kids who dream to finish school and go to Western Europe and…

You are certainly right for many participating in this short squeeze. But collectively this short squeeze is undeniable proof that what's good for the goose is not good for the gander. The hedge funds play by a separate set of rules from the rest of us.

Re: Discord bans r/WallStreetBets server, subreddit went private for a while

#178

Post by [deleted] »

BoorishBears wrote: post #34
luxuryballs wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’d be surprised what kind of asinine bullshit they will ban a server over. Feels like everywhere you go these days some real or virtual administrator is pre-determining how much risk you’re allowed to put yourself in.

I joined the server and the first thing I saw was a mod saying the N word with hard R. Check their history and there's literally pages of it. I didn't appreciate that so I reported it and left. - Lots of people confusing this with not liking WSB. The other WSB discord which was linked to the subreddit was fine even though it was barely moderated. Rough around the edges like WSB tends to be... but fine as a place to h…

[deleted]

Re: Discord bans r/WallStreetBets server, subreddit went private for a while

#179

Post by luxuryballs »

foofoo4u wrote: post #119

Is there a resource I can read or a video I can watch that can give an overview of what's going on here? I keep seeing articles about WSB, Gamestop and the market. But I don't quite understand what is going on and why.

TLDR the crumbs noticed some major shorts put in by big hedge fund so they started buying up the stock to drive up the value causing the hedge fund to risk losing multiple billions of dollars on the short, it went viral and here we are. Don’t quote me on this but I think the shorts “activate” on Friday.

Re: Discord bans r/WallStreetBets server, subreddit went private for a while

#180

Post by Blikkentrekker »

BelenusMordred wrote: post #16

For all the uneasy feelings I get about the triggerhappy banning by these platforms, there's probably a light at end of the tunnel. Boot enough people and the better alternatives might actually flourish with network effects.

Apparently 4chan floods with increase in traffic after such waves.

8chan, which was far better, went under for it though.

Post reply on HN