Live data from Hacker News

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

theverge.com

751–760 of 1001 posts

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

#751
post #741

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a tired old argument and it isn't convincing or effective. There's a big difference between some kids screaming in your coffee shop and a community on a website supposedly dedicated to free discussion. A more apt comparison would be a group in a corner having a conversation at a rock concert. Suddenly this argument appears less apt. And while some are screaming for these sites to get shut down over it, most o…

Where does discord say it's for free discussion? In two clicks I found their community guidelines on their website: https://discord.com/guidelines Second rule: "Do not organize, promote, or coordinate servers around hate speech. It’s unacceptable to attack a person or a community based on attributes such as their race, ethnicity, national origin, sex, gender, sexual orientation, religious affiliation, or disabilities…

I'm 100% with you. People that don't want their discussion controlled by a private entity with conflicting interests should absolutely not depend on that entity's services. Everyone upset about this should stop using discord.

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

#752

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but I also support the mods’ right to ban them for getting their point across this way. Deplatforming is itself guaranteed by freedom of speech.

I don't think it's this simple. That interpretation of freedom of speech seems a bit literal. The point is that people should have the ability to voice their opinions, and have their voice heard if anyone wants to hear it. Since today that's done primarily through social media sites, blogs, and videos, preventing people from using those mediums is limiting their freedom of speech. And of course I'm not saying there a…

Not sure. Back in the day it was very common to buy space in a local newspaper and print messages there. The newspaper could (and would!) deny publication of auch messages arbitraily.

Living in Germany with laws that ban you from displaying Nazi insignia or spouting certain phrases in public, I don't really believe in the whole "if we ban a certain thing there is a slippery slope and suddenly everyhing is banned". German society more or less collectively decided that tolerance for the intolerant is stupid and did something about it.

This might seem a little extrem from an US perspective, but just like that the prudeness of US society seems extreme to us Europeans. You talk about freedom of speech and censor every female nipple there is? Really?

What we will and won't tolerate in public forums is a mirror of our respective societies and values. And there is always something we will have to ban or at least frown uppon. E.g. even in the US child molesters won't be very able to talk about how their believes are okay etc.

And because all out free speech is destructive we have to strike a balance somewhere inbetween disincentivising people who use free speech to get rid of it and not turning into thought police.

Seen from a German perspective the US is so polarized that the polarization alone disencourages most people from leading a free and meaningful discourse.

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

#753

This is really exciting, feels like open standards, independent internet is going to continue getting extreme motivation to expand and establish, with private "freedom of speech" censorship by for-profit platforms. We're going to see more fragmentation, and growth of closed platforms perceived by users as "slightly less evil" such as telegram vs watsapp. This may also motivate the return to truly open internet ideals…

Nah, they'll just go on 4chan like everything else being censored.

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

#754

This is really exciting, feels like open standards, independent internet is going to continue getting extreme motivation to expand and establish, with private "freedom of speech" censorship by for-profit platforms. We're going to see more fragmentation, and growth of closed platforms perceived by users as "slightly less evil" such as telegram vs watsapp. This may also motivate the return to truly open internet ideals…

People need to stop being so lazy and throwing around the word censorship. If a bunch or teenagers come into my coffee shop and start loudly calling each autists and retards I'm going to kick them out. I'm not censoring them by kicking them out.

It's more like a group of people open a coffee shop in your mall and you decide to close their shop once you learn they serve people who don't speak your language.

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

#755
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…

> 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 Hmm, it's almost as if this just happened recently, but people looked the other away because it was tightly coupled to politics. I think 2021 is going to blow 2020 out of the water.

I don't think as many people looked the other way as you suspect. I was happy about the first instance for the same reason I'm happy about this instance. I want to see them all burn to the ground so we can go back to the principles of the web pre web2.0 but building it back better and more resilient to being hijacked by corporate money.

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

#756

This is really exciting, feels like open standards, independent internet is going to continue getting extreme motivation to expand and establish, with private "freedom of speech" censorship by for-profit platforms. We're going to see more fragmentation, and growth of closed platforms perceived by users as "slightly less evil" such as telegram vs watsapp. This may also motivate the return to truly open internet ideals…

I don't know where you even come up with these outdated ideas. Very few people care about what you are talking about. The subset of people who care are: tech savvy, young, mostly male, and vaguely misanthropic. This demographic is already served in numerous places, and everyone else is rather glad to see these people chased off of platforms they use for sharing videos of dancing and food.

He’s saying this will give people a reason to think more about these things.

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

#757
post #652

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any on-line venue is a place where mods and admins make the rules. You know them before going in. Their place, their rules. It’s the same when going into any bar. Some bars may allow rowdy behavior, others have strict measures. In such places speech is a privilege and not a right. The only remarkable thing here in this article is the size of the discord. The problem with huge size is that the amplification effect is…

To reuse your bar analogy. I came in and said 'dont you think the tea is not warm enough' owner said 'uhh nooo' I said 'really, I never drank tea that cold, i think it's a lot better warmer' when suddenly the chair was removed from behind and I was thrown out. Maybe I didn't see the sign 'no complaints about tea temperature allowed in here or you will be removed asap' but I found the whole ordeal ridiculously immatur…

If that truly is the case, then I should stand corrected. Thing is, I just looked at the responses on WSB, and “immature” would probably describe the comments really well. I didn’t see any arguments or actual coherent speech, to what is probably a lot of in-crowd signals / meme-ing.

What I am looking forward though is a good in-depth review of what happened, preferably from a neutral party. Because there seem to be politics involved as well (as in wall street influencing)

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

#758

This is really exciting, feels like open standards, independent internet is going to continue getting extreme motivation to expand and establish, with private "freedom of speech" censorship by for-profit platforms. We're going to see more fragmentation, and growth of closed platforms perceived by users as "slightly less evil" such as telegram vs watsapp. This may also motivate the return to truly open internet ideals…

People need to stop being so lazy and throwing around the word censorship. If a bunch or teenagers come into my coffee shop and start loudly calling each autists and retards I'm going to kick them out. I'm not censoring them by kicking them out.

I don't think the metaphore holds. Everyone can hear the coffee shop kids regardless of whether they want to or not, but only those who seek it out can read the discord.

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

#759

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is nothing preventing an open standard moderation tag that each user selects how to treat. With such moderation tagging in place, for example, if I wanted to use Reddit but mistrust moderators, with an open treatment of data, I would be able to select to ignore their rating/per entry and use ratings by a group of users I select. (impossible to imagine Reddit doing something like this) However, it requires I hav…

This seems to misunderstand the purpose of moderation entirely. Moderation serves many purposes, but only one of them is to save your delicate eyes from seeing things you don't want to see. Perhaps the more important one are things like: ensuring that your social media service doesn't have a bad reputation so that people other than disaffected white guys will actually want to use it. If your site is overrun with porn…

This seems to be easily solvable by just making moderation an opt-out default. HN itself has the "showdead" setting, which defaults to false. Anyone who forms their opinion on a community after deliberately turning off moderation is either a moron or trying to intentionally discredit that community.

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

#760

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is nothing preventing an open standard moderation tag that each user selects how to treat. With such moderation tagging in place, for example, if I wanted to use Reddit but mistrust moderators, with an open treatment of data, I would be able to select to ignore their rating/per entry and use ratings by a group of users I select. (impossible to imagine Reddit doing something like this) However, it requires I hav…

This seems to misunderstand the purpose of moderation entirely. Moderation serves many purposes, but only one of them is to save your delicate eyes from seeing things you don't want to see. Perhaps the more important one are things like: ensuring that your social media service doesn't have a bad reputation so that people other than disaffected white guys will actually want to use it. If your site is overrun with porn…

Which is why defaults are important. You have your default filters filter out the stuff the mods dislike.
Post reply on HN