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

291–300 of 1001 posts

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

#291

Post by mech422 »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #197
disgrunt wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Does it prove that? I tend to agree that it's true, but I don't see what it has to do with the current situation. If anything, I expect most people to argue the opposite - when the price drops again, and some retail traders lose their shirts, there will inevitably be a flood of thinkpieces about how cruel the financial system is for permitting them to lose money on the same terms as a hedge fund.

I tend to think people's losses will be smaller (as individuals) then everyone seems to think. This is reddit we're talking about, and people using RobinHood. I'm guessing losses for those that didn't get out will be limited to beer money. I think the reason they could squeeze the shorts is because of the size of their army, not the depth of their war chest...

After all, its all about the lulz...

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

#292

Post by not_a_moth »

johncessna wrote: post #127

>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.” Funny how that works. If they're not careful, people might start to think 'Hate Speech' could be misused to pursue an agenda. 'It's not that I disagree with what they are doing, they should have just called each other assholes instead of the X…

> people might start to think 'Hate Speech' could be misused to pursue an agenda

If people don't already think this then they haven't been living in America.

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

#293

Post by aeturnum »

SirensOfTitan wrote: post #259

Remember: Parler tried “making their own X”. They were taken offline by a concerted effort at every level, despite the fact that a large portion of the capitol protests were organized on Facebook and YouTube. Anyone who’s ever been an activist for long enough knows that the censorship that silenced your enemies will eventually silence you. Corporate policing of speech needs to stop.

I'm of two minds.

It's absolutely true that unpopular minorities (of whatever kind) should be able to talk. It's also absolutely true that virality can create dangerous situations which are difficult to control.

Instead of banning, which I agree has problems, I favor putting questionable communities in a 'slow mode' where people need to wait to join them (and maybe communications within the community are delayed). Then, in 5 or 10 or 15 days, you can see if the community is still 'a problem' (whatever that means in this situation) and if greater moderation is required. The idea is to preserve communities that build over time, give admins time to make decisions, and highlight the hard questions that need to be answered by platforms.

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

#294

Post by rory »

cesarb wrote: post #170
rory wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They've officially ticked off rich and well-connected people, so regulators are coming to shake the tree branch (I have no idea whether what they're doing is illegal or not) and the platforms want to distance themselves from that ASAP.

I have an alternative theory: the events of three weeks ago in the USA made these platforms much more trigger-happy than usual. Where before they might have let it slide, nowadays (and for a while) they will want to take no risks.

I don't think that's necessarily alternative. Probably, both your theory and mine are parts of the explanation.

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

#296

Post by Miner49er »

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…

> All the anti establishment movement is nihilistic in its core.

Hoping/imagining that society can do better isn't nihilistic.

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

#297

Post by epistasis »

jfim wrote: post #266
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.

It has happened in the past: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/squeeze-on-goldman-put-fal... and https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2012-2012-122htm

It looks like Falcone may have been ok both sides of the squeeze, or at least treating its customers differently in order to execute it?

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

#298

Post by wvenable »

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.

I agree with you but I don't have any uneasy feelings -- these are private companies doing whatever they want with their resources. The sooner everybody wakes up to this fact, the sooner all this pointless hand-wringing will be over.

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

#299

Post by rococode »

kgin wrote: post #17

I have no doubt the timing was extremely intentional.

Ironically it probably brought a lot more attention to Discord than they would've had otherwise. I didn't see a single news article mention the Discord group until it was banned. Why would they? It was just a minor subset of the main group. Although... maybe that was the play here? Plenty of fresh eyes checking out and learning about Discord now.

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

#300

Post by shp0ngle »

SirensOfTitan wrote: post #259

Remember: Parler tried “making their own X”. They were taken offline by a concerted effort at every level, despite the fact that a large portion of the capitol protests were organized on Facebook and YouTube. Anyone who’s ever been an activist for long enough knows that the censorship that silenced your enemies will eventually silence you. Corporate policing of speech needs to stop.

Parler is back online, isn’t it?

edit: oh ok only the domain is, with some random content, not the network. all right

gab seems to be still on

Post reply on HN