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

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

engadget.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 141 posts

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

#121

Post by arprocter »

fixermark wrote: post #114
baddox wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The discussion is not over whether to ban only /r/coontown.

But the discussion is also not over whether to ban most, all, or even some subreddit's. It's over a fairly targeted removal, though reddit doesn't have a rubric for targeting in the future, which understandably makes some people nervous---people who like a nice, ordered, clear set of rails to ride on. But this is social, and that's not how social works. It still doesn't take much common sense to guess at what's in an…

Until they explain what their plans are tomorrow, we are all just guessing what the future will be

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

#122

Post by arprocter »

johrn wrote: post #108
clavalle wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't mind if they get rid of the hate groups but you have to be careful -- hate is a very plastic term. If people feel like their self formed communities might come under some sort of 'distaste' police, they might just pack up and go somewhere else. Most people aren't afraid that they'll go after subreddits that are blatantly racist, they are afraid that is just the opening salvo. They are afraid that the whole pl…

I guess that might be something to worry about if it starts to happen. But I think it's a pretty poor argument to say "well if they ban racism , what's next?"

It's interesting to see what is announced tomorrow.

A lot of people in this thread are mentioning the default subs - how is a mod of a sub with 8 million subscribers supposed to make sure every single thing posted isn't 'offensive'?

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

#123

Post by arprocter »

waterlesscloud wrote: post #93

The reason this is a terrible mistake for Reddit is that now their next several years of corporate narrative will be dominated by which subs should be banned. They won't really be able to get much else attention for anything else. When they try, the conversation will be hijacked and diverted to "When will you ban subreddit X?" Once the door for this kind of thing is open this wide, it's all they're going to be able t…

Also look at the wack-a-mole which happened after the subs were banned the other day - users trolled the admins by making eleventeen new versions of the same subs

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

#124

Post by someone7x »

fixermark wrote: post #114
baddox wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The discussion is not over whether to ban only /r/coontown.

But the discussion is also not over whether to ban most, all, or even some subreddit's. It's over a fairly targeted removal, though reddit doesn't have a rubric for targeting in the future, which understandably makes some people nervous---people who like a nice, ordered, clear set of rails to ride on. But this is social, and that's not how social works. It still doesn't take much common sense to guess at what's in an…

I don't feel like your 2015 phrasing captures the essence of the announcement. The announcement says less that free speech didn't work and more that free speech was never a goal.

That's why the contrast between the quotes is so notable: "Neither Alexis nor I created reddit to be a bastion of free speech, but rather as a place where open and honest discussion can happen"

I guess I just disagree on what we're basically seeing.

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

#125

Post by arprocter »

johrn wrote: post #90
wnevets wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only users interested in /r/stormfront would visit tho. Its not like removing /r/stormfront somehow deletes racism or prevents stormfront from recruiting in the comments, news post, etc.

That's true, but it does make it clearer that they aren't welcome on the site. If Reddit deleted the subs that I visit and care about, I'd definitely feel less like giving them pageviews.

But once you make it policy to remove 'bad' things, it can look like you endorse all the borderline things which remain

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

#126

Post by baddox »

SwellJoe wrote: post #116
mreiland wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps a bit extreme, but the underlying point is applicable here. First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Socialist. Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Trade Unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

There is no talk of banning socialists, trade unionists, Jews, or any other thing that is not a subreddit or user devoted to hate. Further, no one is "coming for" redditors that spew hate...they're merely being shown the door. The comparison of this quote, which is about people literally being thrown into jail for their beliefs, to racists being told they can't post hate speech on a privately owned website, is dising…

> about reddit’s policy on the more offensive and obscene content on our platform.

As is readily apparent, literally anything can be considered offensive and obscene.

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

#127

Post by fixermark »

someone7x wrote: post #124
fixermark wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the discussion is also not over whether to ban most, all, or even some subreddit's. It's over a fairly targeted removal, though reddit doesn't have a rubric for targeting in the future, which understandably makes some people nervous---people who like a nice, ordered, clear set of rails to ride on. But this is social, and that's not how social works. It still doesn't take much common sense to guess at what's in an…

I don't feel like your 2015 phrasing captures the essence of the announcement. The announcement says less that free speech didn't work and more that free speech was never a goal. That's why the contrast between the quotes is so notable: "Neither Alexis nor I created reddit to be a bastion of free speech, but rather as a place where open and honest discussion can happen" I guess I just disagree on what we're basically…

Well, I never accused Reddit leadership of being consistent. ;)

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

#128

Post by fixermark »

baddox wrote: post #126
SwellJoe wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no talk of banning socialists, trade unionists, Jews, or any other thing that is not a subreddit or user devoted to hate. Further, no one is "coming for" redditors that spew hate...they're merely being shown the door. The comparison of this quote, which is about people literally being thrown into jail for their beliefs, to racists being told they can't post hate speech on a privately owned website, is dising…

> about reddit’s policy on the more offensive and obscene content on our platform. As is readily apparent, literally anything can be considered offensive and obscene.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree on definitions of "readily apparent" and "literally anything."

Though the "I know it when I see it" definition of obscenity is frustratingly open, it actually works in practice. Real human societies have implemented it and continue to implement it. This is not something you can write a script for, but that doesn't mean it doesn't work (I find technically-minded people generally have a bias against things that can't even be scripted in theory... Those things make up a lot of the world, inconveniently).

And yes, that means Redditors live in a world of ambiguity. Welcome to the world, I guess. Such ambiguity doesn't imply that, say, /r/science or /r/popmusic would be on the chopping block, and it'd be absurd to argue it does.

At least, the fact that /r/coontown is on the chopping block doesn't threaten /r/science any more than some hypothetical change in leadership in the future that decides Reddit is more profitable without any subreddits, and that can be a good enough point to settle on.

So relax; your favorite subreddit is not under threat, unless it probably should be. Ambiguity is the nature of real social structures, because humans are ambiguous creatures. ;)

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

#129

Post by clavalle »

johrn wrote: post #108
clavalle wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't mind if they get rid of the hate groups but you have to be careful -- hate is a very plastic term. If people feel like their self formed communities might come under some sort of 'distaste' police, they might just pack up and go somewhere else. Most people aren't afraid that they'll go after subreddits that are blatantly racist, they are afraid that is just the opening salvo. They are afraid that the whole pl…

I guess that might be something to worry about if it starts to happen. But I think it's a pretty poor argument to say "well if they ban racism , what's next?"

Well, it's not just racism, even at this point, is it?

It's an odd hodgepodge. Another reason why it is probably worrying people more than it probably should.

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

#130

Post by clavalle »

arprocter wrote: post #122
johrn wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess that might be something to worry about if it starts to happen. But I think it's a pretty poor argument to say "well if they ban racism , what's next?"

It's interesting to see what is announced tomorrow. A lot of people in this thread are mentioning the default subs - how is a mod of a sub with 8 million subscribers supposed to make sure every single thing posted isn't 'offensive'?

Yeah. I'd classify it as a Very Hard Problem.
Post reply on HN