Former Reddit CEO says the site's about to be purged • Hacker News Board

Re: Former Reddit CEO says the site's about to be purged

#61

Post by johrn » Wed, Jul 15, 2015, 5:33 PM UTC

baddox wrote: post #31

austenallred wrote: post #18

I honestly wouldn't mind a "purge." I don't necessarily agree that drawing the line as to what is appropriate on a website is necessarily the destruction of people being able to express themselves. HackerNews doesn't allow racism, but I don't feel my right to express my opinion (for the most part - the hivemind that is caused by upvoting comments is troubling, but another issue altogether). If people want to be blata…

> The only rational argument people can make against the "purging" (of blatantly racist etc. subreddits) is the "slippery slope" argument, which is usually known as a fallacious logical device. Not at all true. I don't like any removal of content by reddit employees (as opposed to subreddit moderators) beyond what is required by law. Whether it leads to more and more removal in the future is irrelevant. I would like…

> I would like reddit to be a place for completely free, uncensored expression.

This is nice in theory, but it basically requires defending the rights of hate groups to silence those they hate. It's hard to freely express yourself when there are people calling for your extermination, or treating everything you say as if it came from the mouth of a five year old.

Re: Former Reddit CEO says the site's about to be purged

#62

Post by publicfig » Wed, Jul 15, 2015, 5:33 PM UTC

dang wrote: post #37

The rule of thumb for ongoing stories on HN is to have a new thread each time there's significant new information, and (hopefully) have it point to the most substantive source. Neither this story nor the article comes close to passing that test, so I'm burying this post as a dupe.

What story mentions the same information this one does that has been on the front page? This, at least to me, seemed to be new information. Posts about reddit seem to be more harshly removed from the front page than other stories, is it because it's a Y Combinator-backed company?

Re: Former Reddit CEO says the site's about to be purged

#63

Post by mcphage » Wed, Jul 15, 2015, 5:33 PM UTC

maaku wrote: post #50

differentView wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They should ask for a refund.

Har har har. But in all seriousness Reddit become the phenomenon it is because of its users, and the many hours, days, weeks, and months they each individually put in to build communities. To create something with value, larger than themselves. Who's going to rufund that time investment?

> Who's going to rufund that time investment?

Well, what's that time worth? If they can find a site that will pay them all for that time investment, then maybe we could start to attach a value to it.

Re: Former Reddit CEO says the site's about to be purged

#64

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Jul 15, 2015, 5:34 PM UTC

trose wrote: post #4

I for one would a little sanitization of the site. There are always going to be weirdos posting horrendous content on the internet but I'm not particularly inclined to deal with that trash. I'd love a Reddit this is only cat pics, interesting stories from other users, and celebrity interviews. We dont need to make it easy for trolls to discuss their racist/ sexist/ bullshit and harass people.

[deleted]

Re: Former Reddit CEO says the site's about to be purged

#65

Post by MichaelGG » Wed, Jul 15, 2015, 5:34 PM UTC

nathanvanfleet wrote: post #2

Does Yishan Wong have some sort of huge grudge with Reddit? He seems to be constantly talking about inside/advance information about what's happening.

He's posting with admin flair. So reddit is still allowing him to do so? Maybe this is just a PR stunt?

Re: Former Reddit CEO says the site's about to be purged

#66

Post by fixermark » Wed, Jul 15, 2015, 5:34 PM UTC

maaku wrote: post #50

differentView wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They should ask for a refund.

Har har har. But in all seriousness Reddit become the phenomenon it is because of its users, and the many hours, days, weeks, and months they each individually put in to build communities. To create something with value, larger than themselves. Who's going to rufund that time investment?

The people who invested in /r/coontown and /r/fatpeoplehate don't deserve a refund from Reddit (or anyone else, for that matter).

Most of Reddit's users aren't going to find their subreddits of choice interfered with.

And honestly, the people who are going to get smacked by this are well capable of forming social connections that transcend Reddit, so they haven't lost all of their investment. But investment of time doesn't in itself guarantee a refund---never does, shouldn't be expected to without a contract in place.

Re: Former Reddit CEO says the site's about to be purged

#67

Post by netcan » Wed, Jul 15, 2015, 5:36 PM UTC

maaku wrote: post #23

sharkweek wrote: post #8

Eh... it's their playground. While I don't like the idea of what's offensive being so subjective, there is A LOT of shit on Reddit that I would be happy to see gone. If Costco had a corner in every store where people were allowed to stand around yelling racist commentary all the time, and Costco laid out a policy to remove this from their stores, I think the majority of people would applaud this move, thus improving…

Reddit is an anarchist experiment. No centralized filtering except where external laws are clearly being broken, and even then only in the most extreme cases of violence or exploitation (e.g. child pornography). Whether that is a good thing or a bad thing is worth debating. But it absolutely must be said that the anarchy defines what Reddit is . With active moderation, it won't be Reddit, it'll be something else. May…

There's some arguments that anarchy is only possible/advisable in smaller communities. The United States can't be a (functional) anarchy, but maybe the US virgin Islands could be.

Maybe that applies here. It's to big to be free.

Re: Former Reddit CEO says the site's about to be purged

#68

Post by Lawtonfogle » Wed, Jul 15, 2015, 5:36 PM UTC

acbart wrote: post #14

sharkweek wrote: post #8

Eh... it's their playground. While I don't like the idea of what's offensive being so subjective, there is A LOT of shit on Reddit that I would be happy to see gone. If Costco had a corner in every store where people were allowed to stand around yelling racist commentary all the time, and Costco laid out a policy to remove this from their stores, I think the majority of people would applaud this move, thus improving…

Well, people don't go to Costco for commentary, they go there to buy things. So a more apt comparison would be a section that sells things that certain groups may find offensive - e.g., sex toys, confederate flags, bibles, guns[1]. The metaphor holds mostly, Costco is free to do what it wants to cater to those people, but I don't think it's unreasonable for some groups to want to fight to hold on. It's hard to make b…

Imagine if Costco sold itself as the go to sight for all your political needs. They sold what ever political prop you wanted. They carried everything. Costco promised all parties that weren't terrorist were allowed. Most of it wasn't on the store floor in the physical buildings, but you could go online or order it to be delivered. As such, many smaller parties made Costco the go to place for all party related needs while in other cases Costco was better than the official party.

Then they decided to remove some crazy political party's items for sale. Say one of the anti-immigration parties in Europe. Then they took out the US Tea Party. Then ex-Costco leaders said a purge was coming. Now people are left wondering which party is next. That if their political party's goal doesn't align, they may be kicked out. Not a massive problem, except that Costco picked up a lot of the market share and thus has not insignificant voice in larger matters. Do now the political parties are pulling back and thinking they need to pick some other entity as their official seller.

Re: Former Reddit CEO says the site's about to be purged

#69

Post by SwellJoe » Wed, Jul 15, 2015, 5:37 PM UTC

baddox wrote: post #31

austenallred wrote: post #18

I honestly wouldn't mind a "purge." I don't necessarily agree that drawing the line as to what is appropriate on a website is necessarily the destruction of people being able to express themselves. HackerNews doesn't allow racism, but I don't feel my right to express my opinion (for the most part - the hivemind that is caused by upvoting comments is troubling, but another issue altogether). If people want to be blata…

> The only rational argument people can make against the "purging" (of blatantly racist etc. subreddits) is the "slippery slope" argument, which is usually known as a fallacious logical device. Not at all true. I don't like any removal of content by reddit employees (as opposed to subreddit moderators) beyond what is required by law. Whether it leads to more and more removal in the future is irrelevant. I would like…

So, why are you here at HN, which has much stricter guidelines and much more active moderators than reddit will ever have site-wide? Reddit is still vastly more "free" than HN, and yet...the caliber of conversation here is generally higher (not always, and the HN demographic has its blind spots), and I believe it is precisely because it has no tolerance for fools.

In short, I don't care about racist's "right" to rant on reddit. They can go write it on the wall of the cave they live in, for all I care.

Re: Former Reddit CEO says the site's about to be purged

#70

Post by vonklaus » Wed, Jul 15, 2015, 5:37 PM UTC

dang wrote: post #37

The rule of thumb for ongoing stories on HN is to have a new thread each time there's significant new information, and (hopefully) have it point to the most substantive source. Neither this story nor the article comes close to passing that test, so I'm burying this post as a dupe.

As a rule of thumb it is good to bury posts that are duplicative so the front page isn't devoted entirely to a single subject. However, it does seem like a conflict of interest given YCs involvement in reddit.