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

Trump’s brigade took over Reddit. Now Reddit is changing its rules to stop them

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 41 posts

Re: Trump’s brigade took over Reddit. Now Reddit is changing its rules to stop them

#31

Post by back_beyond »

vinhboy wrote: post #7
thescribe wrote: post #2

I feel like this article may be a bit unfair. It sounds like organically a community wields a large number of votes, and they aren't getting the same treatment as other communities on Reddit?

Did you even read the article? They are being targeted because they are engaging in vote manipulation. Members of other subreddit don't collude to upvote everything and try to get into /r/all. They also don't go and attack other subs. Also, the racist and sexist nature of the posts makes it inappropriate. Reddit has already taken a stance against this sort of content when it banned a bunch of subreddits a few months…

What are some examples of racist and sexist posts from /r/the_donald that have gained traction?

Is censorship of "inappropriate" speech the right precedent?

Re: Trump’s brigade took over Reddit. Now Reddit is changing its rules to stop them

#32

Post by trowawee »

back_beyond wrote: post #30
ddacunha wrote: post #27

As a regular visitor of /r/all The_Donald is spoiling the experience. Racism and bigotry aside, if all posts are coming from the same sub there is a point to change the rules of /r/all. EDIT: for typos

What do you mean by "racism and bigotry aside"?

I think it means that r/the_donald is a fountain of racism and bigotry.

Re: Trump’s brigade took over Reddit. Now Reddit is changing its rules to stop them

#33

Post by back_beyond »

trowawee wrote: post #32
back_beyond wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean by "racism and bigotry aside"?

I think it means that r/the_donald is a fountain of racism and bigotry.

I understood that. Let me clarify: what are examples of racism and bigotry that have gained traction? Let's define "gained traction" as 1000 upvotes. Although, I'm open to a better definition.

Re: Trump’s brigade took over Reddit. Now Reddit is changing its rules to stop them

#35

Post by hisyam »

SixSigma wrote: post #4

When s4p took over reddit, no-one batted an eye

r/s4p might be little annoying but they didn't:

- post dozens of pictures of Hillary kissing the KKK in a single day

- post a bunch of cropped centipede pictures that can be combined when browsing r/all

- etc

If they want to promote their favorite politician, I understand but populating 40% of r/all with meme shitposts will make the admins take actions.

Re: Trump’s brigade took over Reddit. Now Reddit is changing its rules to stop them

#37

Post by basch »

back_beyond wrote: post #31
vinhboy wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you even read the article? They are being targeted because they are engaging in vote manipulation. Members of other subreddit don't collude to upvote everything and try to get into /r/all. They also don't go and attack other subs. Also, the racist and sexist nature of the posts makes it inappropriate. Reddit has already taken a stance against this sort of content when it banned a bunch of subreddits a few months…

What are some examples of racist and sexist posts from /r/the_donald that have gained traction? Is censorship of "inappropriate" speech the right precedent?

censorship would be taking away their sub or removing it entirely from /r/all

turning the volume down on one tv because they are purposely boosting it to drown out other tvs is not censorship.

Re: Trump’s brigade took over Reddit. Now Reddit is changing its rules to stop them

#38

Post by back_beyond »

basch wrote: post #37
back_beyond wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are some examples of racist and sexist posts from /r/the_donald that have gained traction? Is censorship of "inappropriate" speech the right precedent?

censorship would be taking away their sub or removing it entirely from /r/all turning the volume down on one tv because they are purposely boosting it to drown out other tvs is not censorship.

If restricting the message of a movement isn't censorship, that's news to me.

Re: Trump’s brigade took over Reddit. Now Reddit is changing its rules to stop them

#39

Post by basch »

back_beyond wrote: post #38
basch wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

censorship would be taking away their sub or removing it entirely from /r/all turning the volume down on one tv because they are purposely boosting it to drown out other tvs is not censorship.

If restricting the message of a movement isn't censorship, that's news to me.

/r/all is an algorithmically balanced sample of everything going on on reddit. it is in everyones best interest to keep one subcommunity from shouting over everyone else. letting them speak, but peppering in more of the other posts is not censorship.

Re: Trump’s brigade took over Reddit. Now Reddit is changing its rules to stop them

#40

Post by back_beyond »

basch wrote: post #39
back_beyond wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If restricting the message of a movement isn't censorship, that's news to me.

/r/all is an algorithmically balanced sample of everything going on on reddit. it is in everyones best interest to keep one subcommunity from shouting over everyone else. letting them speak, but peppering in more of the other posts is not censorship.

We should limit a community's exposure, even if it's organic and consistently one of the most active[1] on all of Reddit? What if we gave extra votes to lesser-represented political parties because, you know, they have good ideas too - right? Let's not pretend that this algorithmic change won't have the same impact.

[1] http://redditlist.com/

Post reply on HN