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

Reddark: Website to watch subreddits going dark

reddark.netlify.app

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 380 posts

Re: Reddark: Website to watch subreddits going dark

#351

Post by breakingcups »

nulbyte wrote: post #203
squeaky-clean wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is pretty much what Reddit is doing. All the major 3rd party apps fall under commercial usage. The main issue is the price is insanely high for commercial apps. https://www.theverge.com/2023/6/7/23752804/reddit-exempt-acc...

Those third party apps aren't commercial use of Reddit. I am the user, not the app. That's like saying you can't use Chrome to view some website that prohibits commercial usage. That argument makes no sense.

They are seeing it as commercial use because those alternative apps have their own advertisements from which they make the majority of their money, which is specifically banned under the new terms.

Re: Reddark: Website to watch subreddits going dark

#352

Post by dang »

redeeman wrote: post #215
jacquesm wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually did quit Twitter and nothing will be able to make me go back there. Principles and all that. But I suspect that the fraction of people that followed through on their statement that they would leave Twitter is super small. I also haven't gone anywhere else and I feel much the better for it.

[flagged]

Hey, can you please stop posting unsubstantive and flamebait comments? We already had to ask you that (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34972773) and it's still mostly what your account is doing. We have to ban that sort of account. I don't want to ban you because you've also posted some fine comments - e.g. these:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36234093

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36125818

but unfortunately we have to moderate by the bad things people post, not the good things. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.

Re: Reddark: Website to watch subreddits going dark

#353

Post by sangnoir »

jacquesm wrote: post #61

48 hours will not even ding reddit. Do it for a month and it will count, assuming reddit doesn't simply re-enable the subreddits. But obviously the mods here are walking a fine line between pissing off their users and getting reddit to bend over. With camarades.com we had a week long outage because of a fire in EV1's DC which then caused the fire marshal to shut everything down for a week (I don't blame them, but tha…

> Do it for a month and it will count, assuming reddit doesn't simply re-enable the subreddits

Any subreddit that does this will have the community forked before the end of the first week - without the involvement of Reddit Inc.

Re: Reddark: Website to watch subreddits going dark

#354

Post by sverhagen »

squeaky-clean wrote: post #158
sverhagen wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except that ownership of land, in America, on balance, provides a little more security than, um, "owning" a Subreddit. But hey, I don't know much about Reddit, and I've not followed much of the discussion, but has it not come up yet that Reddit could penalize these, um (again), "owners" for their uprising by taking their "ownership" away and opening back up these Subreddits?

> Reddit could penalize these, um (again), "owners" for their uprising by taking their "ownership" away and opening back up these Subreddits? And the US Government has never done anything similar? Heck, they don't even need to be punishing you to take your land, they can just have plans for a highway that will pass through where your house currently is.

I didn't say that the ownership of land was absolute or anything, just that the ownership of Subreddits in any real sense seemed non-existent?

Re: Reddark: Website to watch subreddits going dark

#355

Post by iLoveOncall »

lewisflude wrote: post #190
iLoveOncall wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They claim it's because moderation tools are better on 3rd party apps, the truth is that they just don't want to see ads.

Most moderators overwhelmingly rely on the utility function you get in 3rd party apps that isn't currently in the official app, so I genuinely believe this is one aspect of the protest. I could be wrong, but I genuinely can't see a situation where this amount of action is purely around seeing ads. Pretty unanimously, 3rd party app developers have said they'd happily show Reddit's ads in their feed, but Reddit never c…

Official numbers show that only 3% of moderation actions are performed via third-party apps, putting a definite nail in the coffin of that fabricated argument.

https://www.reddit.com/r/reddit/comments/145bram/addressing_...

Re: Reddark: Website to watch subreddits going dark

#356

Post by bombcar »

worrycue wrote: post #326
bombcar wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Forums were also dedicated to "mostly related" things (like a subreddit) and it was a bit of effort to create a new account on a different forum, and you were obviously new at that point. So "brigading" and such weren't really much of an issue (and the issue has always been people barging into a community, knowing nothing about it, pontificating on some post/issue, and promptly leaving). Forums still exist, but you n…

I wonder if online discussions will shift to Discord channels. Sure it’s another centralised “forum” but it does seem like a credible alternative - a lot of discussion already seem to happens there.

Much already has, and it's very sad, as Discord creates an entirely different "feel" for a community, and is not visible to the Internet at large.

Re: Reddark: Website to watch subreddits going dark

#357

Post by jacquesm »

OkayPhysicist wrote: post #350
jacquesm wrote: post #61

48 hours will not even ding reddit. Do it for a month and it will count, assuming reddit doesn't simply re-enable the subreddits. But obviously the mods here are walking a fine line between pissing off their users and getting reddit to bend over. With camarades.com we had a week long outage because of a fire in EV1's DC which then caused the fire marshal to shut everything down for a week (I don't blame them, but tha…

I think you're misinterpreting how mass protests work: unlike, say, a strike, the goal doesn't have to be to directly apply pain to the target until they yield. Instead, a large scale protest demonstrates, first and foremost, the ability of the opposition to organize (lending credence to the threat of further, more extreme action), and to pull more people into the organized opposition. A two-day blackout is a warning…

Yes, I totally understand the principle, but the persons creating the blackout are themselves entirely optional and they don't seem to fully realize this.

Protests are much stronger if you have a viable alternative lined up. They don't have any.

Re: Reddark: Website to watch subreddits going dark

#358

Post by kbenson »

bombcar wrote: post #319
hipposec wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the other thing that made forums a better place was the absence of a upvote/downvote system. It reduced the motivation of just chasing attention with little jokes and threads could stay on the front page so long as there was active conversation going on.

Forums were also dedicated to "mostly related" things (like a subreddit) and it was a bit of effort to create a new account on a different forum, and you were obviously new at that point. So "brigading" and such weren't really much of an issue (and the issue has always been people barging into a community, knowing nothing about it, pontificating on some post/issue, and promptly leaving). Forums still exist, but you n…

There are lots of solutions to needing to create an account now. There's social logins, and the prevalence of password managers if you want to use an email and can't remember if you already have a login.

Reddit is easier because you already have an account, but creating an account on a random site has never been easier to do or manage, so it's not that much harder (and importantly, people already do it because not everything is on reddit so it's not "new" to learn how to create an account somewhere).

Re: Reddark: Website to watch subreddits going dark

#359

Post by pbhjpbhj »

that_guy_iain wrote: post #164
pbhjpbhj wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you reckon their C-suite are not waged? (What revenue are they working with?) This is a common issue with discussion of companies, people say "look they're not making any money" just because the company accounts are not recording profits. But if you pay out all your money as C-suite wages (for example) then you have "no profits" as a company but people are certainly profiting. Another angle is political steer; you…

So you're saying the C-suite aren't profiting from their work? They do no work? C-suite and other employees profit from selling their time to to Reddit. It's kinda weird to start acting like that isn't how employment works.

u/skinnymuch had it right, sorry if I made it confusing. Basically I'm saying even if the company report no profit, then the executives are probably making bank (earning large personal "profits"!).

Re: Reddark: Website to watch subreddits going dark

#360

Post by zirgs »

flangola7 wrote: post #338
gymbeaux wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe it. That really sounds typical of Reddit.

I don't believe it at all. My unreliable narrator radar is blowing up.

GTA games have been making fun of pretty much everyone. But there's this one group that you're not allowed to tell jokes about.

I'm old enough to remember how gamers laughed at people like Jack Thompson who wanted to censor and ban video games. But now people like him are moderating gaming subreddits and saying that censorship is good actually.

Post reply on HN