851–860 of 996 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
u/Ok-donuts is clearly his alt. Absolutely pathetic
Such accusations are a dime a dozen and almost always false. (I myself have been accused of being people I'm not.) It's simply a fact that there are people who think alike or who form alliances or kneejerk defenses of someone. In any case, Novati is not acting like a disinterested moderator.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
> To be fair, that's an objectively degenerate suggestio You should be a Reddit mod lol This is an "objectively sane" comment that got a lot of upvotes actually
Any suggestion to remove due process or the rule of law from governance is objectively degenerate and retrogressive.
No matter who you are, you do not want to live in that world.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Parent poster isn't saying that r/conservative should be banned for that behavior. Since that sub's arbitrary ban behavior is allowed, other subs banning people for similarly arbitrary reasons (like people who have been vetted by its mod circle into being allowed to post there) should be permitted.
They say "It’s not a real subreddit". I think its reasonable to conclude that they at the very least disapprove of that behaviour To more precisely respond: "A eye for an eye leaves the world blind"
If you think there's a better set of global rules that reddit should adopt, that's a fair observation. But until it does, it's not fair to call out other subs for mirroring the rules of a problem sub. If it can behave that way, so can they. If it can exist as a safe space for MAGAs, the rest of us are free to create a safe space from MAGAs.
I hope this is sarcasm
I'm going to focus on the MODERATION ACCUSATION first since that seems to be the main issue. What moderating r/codingbootcamp actually looks like: I don't own the sub - I report to the owner who asked me to help after I'd been one of the most active and helpful contributors. The coding bootcamp industry is absolutely infested with astroturfing. Brand new accounts, manufactured conversations, fake testimonials. It's c…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> What country are you from? To "wish a politically motivated death" on someone is illegal there? It is illegal in most countries, no? Even in USA you aren't allowed to instigate murder.
I didn't think it should be illegal to say "I wish X were dead" unless you have the means to make it happen like a rabid audience with a track record of killing people you wish were dead. Even then, I think there needs to be coordination or a wink nod of some kind that needs to be proven to muzzle free speech. Freedom of speech we don't like is the true litmus test of free speech. It is trivial to say I support free…
The classic example, is can you shout "Fire!" in a crowded cinema? Should this be illegal in itself? Probably not. But if this causes a panic that kills people in a crush for the exits, then you are very culpable for these deaths.
But even if nothing bad happens, should there be laws against what you did? Saying no is in my mind similar to saying if you shoot at somebody but miss them, did you break any laws?
FWIW, yes, I do support free speech. Very much. But I also recognize you must be responsible for the consequences of what you say, and this leads to some very tricky ethical situations - Should you be held accountable for what could have happened, even if it did not happen?
I'm french I was banned from the France subreddit for saying Hamas fighters dress as civilians. The problem of Reddit goes beyond astroturfing. It's a judge jury executioner problem. Moderation is the most expensive problem of online platforms.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Reading it, seems like the downvotes are deserved.
Downvoting prevents other people from seeing his comments. You need to upvote to make sure everybody sees "his own words", as he put it. That's for the common good.
It's not just him. Nobody uses upvotes for the purpose of "letting others see it". We are supposed to do that but we don't.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can’t help but notice that Twitter and TikTok didn’t get called for that session. In November 2023, Twitter went from a zero tolerance policy for violent speech to “we may remove or reduce the visibility of violent speech.” Seems really relevant for the topic of the hearings! And yet. I’m thus unwilling to take Rep. Comey’s decision to call Reddit to testify as evidence of anything. Feels more like political theate…
While Twitter has many problems it does seem to do a reasonable job of not promoting hate and violence towards a large audience. There's many messages critical of immigrants on my timeline but none calling for violence against them (or any other group that Twitter users dislike). Meanwhile posts about violence against Trump, Musk or celebrating the dead of Kirk did get massive upvotes and visibility on some of the bi…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> - If you post on /r/conservative you can expect to receive a bunch of bans from unrelated (popular) subs. Doesn't matter what you posted, being associated with that subs "taints" your account enough for some moderators. You left out the fact that you can’t post to /r/conservative until the moderators there audit your post history and perform an interview with you to confirm your ideology matches theirs. If someone…
> You left out the fact that you can’t post to /r/conservative until the moderators there audit your post history and perform an interview with you to confirm your ideology matches theirs. > If someone does pass the test they’re allowed to comment. If they make a comment that disagrees with the message the moderators want to push, their commenting privilege is revoked. Be that as it may, i dont see how the solution t…