Earlier quoted context omitted.
www.reddit.com --> old.reddit.com
This plugin redirects you to old.reddit automatically: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/old-reddit-redirec...
You can accomplish this with HTTPS Everywhere too.
Reddit’s most popular subreddits go private in protest against ‘censorship’
521–530 of 561 posts
Re: Reddit’s most popular subreddits go private in protest against ‘censorship’
#522Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The new design collapses all responses below the second level I don't follow. I just opened a random comment thread, and counted comments being shown up to seven levels deep (which was the deepest comment.) Is the behavior you describe only if you're logged out or something?
I also don't follow. Here's a screenshot of the current top comment in the current top thread. It's showing 10 levels deep. https://imgur.com/a/itZrtRK
I think it depends on the age of the post. E.g. this one is showing only two levels for me:
https://imgur.com/a/6egEkGB
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/1czuut/what_is_t...
This typically happens if you google something and the answer is on reddit.
Re: Reddit’s most popular subreddits go private in protest against ‘censorship’
#523Earlier quoted context omitted.
Some people would argue that "censorship" would not apply to a private company owned platform. That only governments and their agents are qualified to perform act of censorship.
So now we've reached the point where we're arguing over the semantic meaning of the word "censorship." While we're here, can you please inform us which word we are allowed to use to describe what reddit is doing?
"moderation", "anti-harassment protection" ( I think that one was used for justifying action against a specific subreddit ), of course reddit would not use a term as bad as "censorship" knowing how much it would cost them.
However, I really feel to clarify that I feel that reddit is in the wrong in endorsing the action of an admin that was clearly censoring mention of their name from the news.
Re: Reddit’s most popular subreddits go private in protest against ‘censorship’
#524Earlier quoted context omitted.
> People who believe that reptiles posing as human beings run the earth are have a platform and some sort of earnest following Those people have always existed. When I was a kid in the 80's, supermarkets carried tabloid newspapers with headlines like "Boy born with head of a bat" or "leading telekinetics agree that world will end in six days". The difference now is that while most of us just shook our heads and dismi…
There’s a big difference, “Weekly World News” was in the grocery aisle between Archie comics and celebrity gossip. It was a fun distraction. Similarly, crazy public access programs were on a specific channel for the purpose of allowing local viewpoints. Editorial standards in the normal media didn’t allow for the type of propaganda that is mainstream today. The NY Times didn’t write about Bigfoot, because it’s silly…
I think most of mainstream outlet are trying to get away with it by tagging these kind of article as "opinion"
Re: Reddit’s most popular subreddits go private in protest against ‘censorship’
#525Earlier quoted context omitted.
>yanking one away wholly from the moderation group Not much of a departure -- they've done it.
And I've eaten an entire pizza, but that doesn't mean my philosophy of eating generally so I don't become obese is invalid.
I think you got it backwards. Reddit not yanking subreddits is an exception that is only afforded to the largest and most visible subs.
Reddit absolutely loves to yank smaller subreddits from mods.
Re: Reddit’s most popular subreddits go private in protest against ‘censorship’
#526Earlier quoted context omitted.
In a rational world, that wouldn't have happened, but we seem to have lost our ability to say behavior A (which has supporting facts) is significantly worse than behavior B (which is alleged). Preying on children, or advocating for those who want to, is a significantly bigger problem than the _accusation_ of bias based on preference.
Do such allegations really hold any real water to achieve political ends? I find that every time I read about such matters, it is from some Anglo-Saxon place where emotions about such matters seem to run high. I cannot think of any Dutch occurrence of someone being dismissed from a party alleging any gender discrimination, and I would to what extent such arguments are truly something that sways the Anglo-Saxon, becau…
Is a claim of discrimination as much of a superweapon of discourse in Dutch culture as it is in the US? From what I've experienced, Europeans are a bit less prickly on such matters.
Re: Reddit’s most popular subreddits go private in protest against ‘censorship’
#527Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tell that to Gab / Parler / etc
They were removed strictly for (supposed) violations of law - what reddit hosts is, at the current time, unquestionably legal. Gab/etc were accused of inciting violence, threats of physical harm, treason, etc. Reddit hasn't been accused of anything like that recently. Regardless of reality, infrastructure companies can make their own decisions on who is guilty and innocent.
Reddit without a shred of doubt has hosted and continues to host illegal content too. I bet you'd find a goldmine of illegal content if you scanned the smaller subs.
You're right about accusations though. It seems that accusation alone is the key factor in whether you remain on AWS. Doesn't aspire confidence in AWS, does it.
Re: Reddit’s most popular subreddits go private in protest against ‘censorship’
#528The Reddit CEO has announced that the employee in question is no longer employed there.
https://www.reddit.com/r/announcements/comments/mcisdf/an_up...
But it's such a weaselly post.
First, it admits they didn't vet her before hiring: "We did not adequately vet her background before formally hiring her." Apparently, a basic google search is too difficult for HR.
Second, it says this: "On March 9th, we added extra protections for this employee, including actioning content that mentioned the employee’s name or shared personal information on third-party sites, which we reserve for serious cases of harassment and doxxing."
OK, and they _still_ didn't check why people were opposed to this person? Still no Internet search or, oh, reading the comments people were posting?
Notice that this "protection" was two weeks ago, not recently.
Re: Reddit’s most popular subreddits go private in protest against ‘censorship’
#529Earlier quoted context omitted.
My information on the topic comes from actual sex workers or women who know them (eg aminadujean, Naomi Wu) whose experience is that anti-trafficing is usually used to try to criminalize their work for their own protection.
> anti-trafficing [sic] is usually used to try to criminalize their work I understand you have anecdotes from 2 women which describe non-coerced criminalized sex work, which is not sex trafficking. My information comes from decades of global, publicly available and verified data. Sex trafficking is a real thing, and you delegitimize its victims when you say otherwise. https://2009-2017.state.gov/documents/organizatio…
(you really don't have to put the emphasis on how much you dislike their spelling of trafficking, everyone can see it's a direct quote and it distracts from the rest of your post)
Re: Reddit’s most popular subreddits go private in protest against ‘censorship’
#530Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's the harm in such a pointless joke? It was silly, but it's not like the meme subreddit he did it to was a super serious one like AskHistorians is.
Would it be ok if Twitter employees secretly changed people's tweets without informing them?
Why not, if they had it in their terms of service?