11–20 of 48 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For shitredditsays, there's also a lot of quoting and satire to account for.
Satire is common on two of the most toxic subreddits, shitredditsays and tumblrinaction. But in both, I think it's clear the sarcasm is sometimes used to hide hatred and bigotry.
"[TumblrInAction], a subreddit dedicated to mocking Tumblr – where marginalized groups, particularly LGBTQ, post about their experiences"
Here they neatly imply r/TumblrInAction mocks LGBTQ issues when in fact, it mocks people who use identities as tools to divide and hit people over the head with. Which is incidentally what this report does:
"Overt bigotry: the use of bigoted (racist/sexist/homophobic etc.) language, whether targeting any particular individual or more generally, which would make members of the referenced group feel highly uncomfortable"
In other words: assuming everyone in group X feels the same way about what the authors consider offensive language. This ignores e.g. the vast amount of gay people on chan boards who say "faggot" for fun to each other.
This so-called bigotry is contrasted with "supportiveness", apparently a desirable trait. Yet you can easily find people's horrible behavior being supported in more hugbox-style forums, when they get into an in/out-group fight and all the niceties go out the window for the sake of victimhood. We saw this with Atheism+, with r/GamerGhazi, and the "women in tech" activists.
Speaking of, notice how they explicitly contrast r/TheRedPill with a companion "Women in Tech" link in the footnote/popup for no stated reason. TheRedPill is supposedly "dedicated to male chauvinism", where "bigoted comments received approval". Well, if you define the entire subreddit's subject matter as bigoted, are you surprised the community appears to support bigotry by your own count? I have read TheRedPill, it is the male equivalent of Jezebel, nothing more, nothing less.
Really, this is just spreading fear about certain reddits, as the summary practically admits: which communities you should avoid, according to data. Yet the most toxic subreddit of all by their own data, ShitRedditSays, is nicely euphemized as home to "unproductive conversations".
Also if the authors think they "delved deep into the darkest recesses of the inter webs," by analyzing reddit comments, they are naive beyond belief.
"[TumblrInAction], a subreddit dedicated to mocking Tumblr – where marginalized groups, particularly LGBTQ, post about their experiences"
Here they neatly imply r/TumblrInAction mocks LGBTQ issues when in fact, it mocks people who use identities as tools to divide and hit people over the head with. Which is incidentally what this report does:
"Overt bigotry: the use of bigoted (racist/sexist/homophobic etc.) language, whether targeting any particular individual or more generally, which would make members of the referenced group feel highly uncomfortable"
In other words: assuming everyone in group X feels the same way about what the authors consider offensive language. This ignores e.g. the vast amount of gay people on chan boards who say "faggot" for fun to each other.
This so-called bigotry is contrasted with "supportiveness", apparently a desirable trait. Yet you can easily find people's horrible behavior being supported in more hugbox-style forums, when they get into an in/out-group fight and all the niceties go out the window for the sake of victimhood. We saw this with Atheism+, with r/GamerGhazi, and the "women in tech" activists.
Speaking of, notice how they explicitly contrast r/TheRedPill with a companion "Women in Tech" link in the footnote/popup for no stated reason. TheRedPill is supposedly "dedicated to male chauvinism", where "bigoted comments received approval". Well, if you define the entire subreddit's subject matter as bigoted, are you surprised the community appears to support bigotry by your own count? I have read TheRedPill, it is the male equivalent of Jezebel, nothing more, nothing less. Really, this is just spreading fear about certain reddits, as the summary practically admits: which communities you should avoid, according to data. Yet the most toxic subreddit of all by their own data, ShitRedditSays, is nicely euphemized as home to "unproductive conversations".
Also if the authors think they "delved deep into the darkest recesses of the inter webs," by analyzing reddit comments, they are naive beyond belief.
This is rather hilariously slanted. "Bigotry by subreddit". Really? "[TumblrInAction], a subreddit dedicated to mocking Tumblr – where marginalized groups, particularly LGBTQ, post about their experiences" Here they neatly imply r/TumblrInAction mocks LGBTQ issues when in fact, it mocks people who use identities as tools to divide and hit people over the head with. Which is incidentally what this report does: "Overt…
Communities built around hatred, justified or not, always end up being toxic. Hatred is sometimes - rarely - justified and necessary, but it is not a healthy emotion to be the main focus on an entire community.
TIL /r/neckbeards harbor bigotry.
/r/canada has zero bigotry! YES!
Edit:I'm sorry. They won't. But it will affect the value.
Some sub-reddits deemed "toxic" I've never encountered much toxicity. I beg to question what qualifies at toxic for this specific research.
I wonder how the scores would be changed if the code could be updated to treat intruding outsiders differently from supported regulars ? I bet you'd see ShitRedditSays and TwoXChromosomes suddenly sink down the "bigoted" ratings, while climbing right to the top of the "under siege" rating.