Discord bans r/WallStreetBets server, subreddit went private for a while • Hacker News Board

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

#561

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Jan 28, 2021, 6:58 AM UTC

ohyes wrote: post #551

14u2c wrote: post #536

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this not the classic problem with all censorship? Of course the majority (and I) would agree that the language used is not productive, but the question of whether something should be allowed, despite its "goodness" (or lack there of), is much more nuanced. I think an argument can be made that the definition of a public forum has changed.

No, it isn't. OP can host his own server and invite his friends and they can say whatever they want there.... but no one has any obligation to give him a venue. If I have a shitty band and I want to book your venue for a gig, you have every right to say to me "no, your band is too shitty for my venue, I don't want to degrade myself or the public in that way." There's very little nuance here at all, no one is saying h…

[deleted]

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

#562

Post by enchiridion » Thu, Jan 28, 2021, 6:58 AM UTC

ohyes wrote: post #551

14u2c wrote: post #536

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this not the classic problem with all censorship? Of course the majority (and I) would agree that the language used is not productive, but the question of whether something should be allowed, despite its "goodness" (or lack there of), is much more nuanced. I think an argument can be made that the definition of a public forum has changed.

No, it isn't. OP can host his own server and invite his friends and they can say whatever they want there.... but no one has any obligation to give him a venue. If I have a shitty band and I want to book your venue for a gig, you have every right to say to me "no, your band is too shitty for my venue, I don't want to degrade myself or the public in that way." There's very little nuance here at all, no one is saying h…

Yes it is. It is not governmental censorship, but it is censorship.

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

#563

Post by gonehome » Thu, Jan 28, 2021, 6:58 AM UTC

ohyes wrote: post #551

14u2c wrote: post #536

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this not the classic problem with all censorship? Of course the majority (and I) would agree that the language used is not productive, but the question of whether something should be allowed, despite its "goodness" (or lack there of), is much more nuanced. I think an argument can be made that the definition of a public forum has changed.

No, it isn't. OP can host his own server and invite his friends and they can say whatever they want there.... but no one has any obligation to give him a venue. If I have a shitty band and I want to book your venue for a gig, you have every right to say to me "no, your band is too shitty for my venue, I don't want to degrade myself or the public in that way." There's very little nuance here at all, no one is saying h…

You seem to think “retarded” is magnitudes worse than all of the other negative words you used and worth shutting down a community for.

I think most people do not think this is true.

I think moderation is hard and I’m generally in favor of private companies being able to moderate how they want (with something like Urbit being a good alternative for a user owned network).

That said, the word policing around this and wsb in particular (a pretty good natured community really) is pretty off.

I think you’re wrong on this one.

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

#564

Post by agumonkey » Thu, Jan 28, 2021, 6:58 AM UTC

px43 wrote: post #537

agumonkey wrote: post #490

Earlier quoted context omitted.

discord is filled with 'snowflakes' (apologies if that seems insulting) I'm only a sample of 1 but on IRC I never felt surrounded by trigger happy mods. on discord I got regularly kicked without notice for some not even heated argument. if I extrapolate, this side of the web is becoming a way for people to craft tiny bubbles to fit their own little views on life.

Discord is an app for kids to talk about playing video games. That's like being upset that you got banned for cussing someone out on Club Penguin. The target audience for Discord is kids, of course they're going to have harsher moderation policies than IRC did back in the day.

should have read the fine print at the back of the box :) /quit

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

#565

Post by oxford_comma » Thu, Jan 28, 2021, 6:58 AM UTC

notRobot wrote: post #548

oscribinn wrote: post #498

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm going to get downvoted for this for sure, but man it's nice to see a hacker news commentator that actually has a pair.

...they have "a pair" because they use words that as a society we've decided shouldn't be used because they're derogatory to a certain group of people?

I understood GP as talking about what is in the 'overton window' or not. You and I may have qualms about saying retard but I've worked in industries where that is not the case. I've met people who would call an unprofitable VC-backed company whose only customer-facing product is a well-designed chat client telling them what is or is not acceptable to say something I wouldn't say here.

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

#566

Post by jhanschoo » Thu, Jan 28, 2021, 7:01 AM UTC

technick wrote: post #474

Discord would claim its “hateful and discriminatory content” for anything in the fucked up reality we are currently living in. For instance, if you call someone retarded and a mod doesn't step in, that is considered hateful. Even though retard is in the dictionary and a widely accepted term by many people. Then saying that only retards buy the shit hedgefunds are peddling would also be considered discriminatory. I'm…

Considering that Discord has a lot of gaming communities with underaged people, I can see the need for heavy moderation wrt language that tend to be used for cyberbullying. Whether or not just deleting the server is a good idea I disagree.

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

#567

Post by nathias » Thu, Jan 28, 2021, 7:01 AM UTC

technick wrote: post #474

Discord would claim its “hateful and discriminatory content” for anything in the fucked up reality we are currently living in. For instance, if you call someone retarded and a mod doesn't step in, that is considered hateful. Even though retard is in the dictionary and a widely accepted term by many people. Then saying that only retards buy the shit hedgefunds are peddling would also be considered discriminatory. I'm…

yes, soon all the pejoratives that I can use to describe a person believing in language policing will be banned...

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

#568

Post by xbmcuser » Thu, Jan 28, 2021, 7:01 AM UTC

oehpr wrote: post #374

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There wouldn't be anything wrong with that. There'd be a lot right with it, honestly - I would be trumpeting it as a clear victory of the little guy over snobby funds who don't think anyone else can understand finance. But what's happening right now is almost certainly a pump and dump with a short squeeze as a facade. I've seen a lot of commenters who seem to be grievously misled about the actual mechanics of a short…

I haven't heard anything to suggest that the short sellers are forced to buy back the stock either. This is a stock has clearly caught public's attention, Once the hype cycle is over, why wouldn't it regress to the mean? Who's going to believe that the stock stays at this level over the long term? Fun to talk about though. This is a very entertaining story.

Shorts borrow the stock for a time period. Let say you borrowed a stock that is $1 from me with the promise you will give the stock back end of the week + some interest. You sell the stock for $1 end of the week the price is $100 so you are on the hook for stock + interest. As the owner of the stock I will be more interested in getting it back and selling it for $100 rather than allowing you to give me the stock later by extending the loan terms when the price might drop.

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

#569

Post by KLexpat » Thu, Jan 28, 2021, 7:03 AM UTC

ohyes wrote: post #519

technick wrote: post #474

Discord would claim its “hateful and discriminatory content” for anything in the fucked up reality we are currently living in. For instance, if you call someone retarded and a mod doesn't step in, that is considered hateful. Even though retard is in the dictionary and a widely accepted term by many people. Then saying that only retards buy the shit hedgefunds are peddling would also be considered discriminatory. I'm…

Get your point across without stomping a category of disabled person and making me think you're an immature shit-for-brains who I don't want to associate with. You act like your dictionary definition of the word 'retard' is some brilliant insight. It's garbage. Everyone, everywhere, would be better off without the 'content' that you're providing. You have the right to say whatever you want and I have the right to thr…

the word retard is common parlance in many parts of the world.

But lets not be retarded about this, the point is more that they are using a puritan argument about the word retard in a retarded manner in order to shut down discourse, to try and retard the share price of a stock, which has had absolutely retarded performance lately.

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

#570

Post by randmeerkat » Thu, Jan 28, 2021, 7:03 AM UTC

This is exactly why I think we’re in late stage capitalism. The economy has become so toxic that an army of retail investors has to yolo their money to try to realize an economic advantage in their lives. When retail investors finally do find a crack in the economic system and make some money, the regulatory body that never cared about the banks and their fraud in 2008, and the corporate enterprises that didn’t broadcast occupy Wall Street, all turn around and try to stop the momentum of WSB. The hypocrisy of it all is unbelievable.