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

A competitor crippled a $23.5M bootcamp by becoming a Reddit moderator

larslofgren.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

891–900 of 996 posts

Re: A competitor crippled a $23.5M bootcamp by becoming a Reddit moderator

#891

Post by johnnyanmac »

mlrtime wrote: post #888
johnnyanmac wrote: post #838

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Could it be that sharing conservative ideas is against Reddit's community guidelines? Sharing conservative ideas is not against reddit's community guidelines. the sitewide guidelines are pretty simple, actually: https://redditinc.com/policies/reddit-rules to summarize: 1. don't harrass people on or off-site, nor promote hate 2. no spam or content manipulation 3. no doxxing nor non-consential sexual material 4. no CS…

To the average reddit, simply being conservative or voting for trump is promoting hate. I guarantee you 100% they think this. Take a /r/all post that is anti trump and read the comments about republicans, they hate them.

Perhaps. But admins won't ban a sub for being conservative or voting for Trump alone. Admins are the ones who can ban subs, not mods.

Mods from there have absolute power, as long as they follow the above guidelines. As we know, the rules can be as petty as they want. Their only limit is that they can't ban someone who's never participated in a sub (so they can't pre-rmotively ban someone for existing)

Re: A competitor crippled a $23.5M bootcamp by becoming a Reddit moderator

#892

Post by zahlman »

johnnyanmac wrote: post #877
zahlman wrote: post #872

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> denying trans people of their identity. That's promoting hate. To be clear: your position is that refusing to see other people as they see themselves, in one specific aspect, is inherently hateful? That's likely the crux of our disagreement in the other subthread, then. Either that or you imagine that "denying identity" refers to something else, but I've only ever seen it used in cases that boil down to that. This…

>your position is that refusing to see other people as they see themselves, in one specific aspect, is inherently hateful? Yes. That tends to fall under "hate speech": >public speech that expresses hate or encourages violence towards a person or group based on something such as race, religion, sex, or sexual orientation Denying existence or identity will fall under that curtain either way. That seems to be the interp…

> Denying existence or identity

These are different things (which was most of the point),

> will fall under that curtain either way

... but I fail to see how in either case.

> Both dehumanize

I don't see this, either.

Again, the actual act we refer to is:

> refusing to see other people as they see themselves, in one specific aspect

Is there any other aspect of how people see themselves which would lead you to the same conclusion? For example, if I consider myself physically attractive, and others disagree, are they hating me?

Re: A competitor crippled a $23.5M bootcamp by becoming a Reddit moderator

#893

Post by zahlman »

johnnyanmac wrote: post #876
zahlman wrote: post #871

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But their party leader does I disagree with this as well, and I specifically disagree that the "actions and statements taken and made" commonly cited to evidence the point actually evidence the point. And I have been disagreeing about this since the 2015 election campaign. The pull quotes, to me, very obviously did not mean what they were represented as meaning, and I remain convinced of this.

>The pull quotes, to me, very obviously did not mean what they were represented as meaning This week alone: - Trump was ranting about Trans athletes. In the middle of a meeting with Canada. - we have had 2 inditements of political opponents based on a DM-mistakenly-turned-tweet listing opponents he wanted sued. - he called democrats a Gnat to take care odd while addressing the generals of the military - he's mobilizi…

[flagged]

Re: A competitor crippled a $23.5M bootcamp by becoming a Reddit moderator

#894

Post by mlrtime »

newyankee wrote: post #665
mike_hearn wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You missed maybe the biggest one, /r/bitcoin, which around 2015 started banning anyone who wanted Bitcoin to actually follow the original design and continue scaling up on-chain transactions. The moderator, some anonymous student (possibly named Michael Marquardt), literally declared anyone who wanted Bitcoin to be used for regular transactions offtopic and banned them on a massive scale. When explaining his actions…

No, the biggest one is r/india as it is the subreddit for the largest country in the world with moderators being from an adversarial country and any positive news about the country always being removed while constant critiques and hate allowed

same as /r/Texas , it's ran by people that hate Texas. It's a sub full of people saying they just want to move.

Re: A competitor crippled a $23.5M bootcamp by becoming a Reddit moderator

#895

Post by mlrtime »

Aurornis wrote: post #647
LaurensBER wrote: post #632

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree with your assessment, if I remember correctly I posted three times on that sub. The HN guidelines are there to improve the quality of the conversation, there's not much to further discuss so I'm going to leave it at this.

> I disagree with your assessment, if I remember correctly I posted three times on that sub. The sub currently requires moderator approval (specific flair) to comment on most threads. The parent commenter is correct: It is widely known as one of the most censored subs on Reddit because the mods remove comments from unapproved accounts (those without flair). Their rules claim that some threads are open for everyone to…

No, they are not correct. They are comparing 1 sub (which they disagree with the whole idea of) vs most every popular sub on reddit. There is no comparison.

Re: A competitor crippled a $23.5M bootcamp by becoming a Reddit moderator

#896

Post by mlrtime »

hilios wrote: post #602
user34283 wrote: post #538

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a very weak argument in my opinion. How does the moderation in /r/conservatives, a subreddit for conservatives to discuss "from a distinctly conservative point of view", concern a liberal like yourself in any way? This isn't a subreddit you need to participate in. I think it's more relevant how default subreddits or country subreddits are moderated in a similar way.

It concerns me insofar as the comment I was responding to, mentioned that participation in /r/conservative got him banned in another subreddit, while failing to mention the nature of /r/conservative as a heavily censored echo chamber.

Because the rest of reddit is a echo chamber of opposing views. How is that not self evident?

Re: A competitor crippled a $23.5M bootcamp by becoming a Reddit moderator

#897

Post by mlrtime »

hilios wrote: post #599
user34283 wrote: post #554

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pointing at the moderation of an explicitly conservative place for right wingers as a grievance to illustrate how it is only balanced how conservative opinions are getting banned across mainstream subreddits is fairly disingenuous. And clearly this has been a discussion on that angle, rather than an answer to the rhetorical question above.

>And clearly this has been a discussion on that angle, rather than an answer to the rhetorical question above. How do you know the question was rhetorical?

[flagged]

Re: A competitor crippled a $23.5M bootcamp by becoming a Reddit moderator

#898

Post by mlrtime »

Aurornis wrote: post #656
user34283 wrote: post #542

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're not a conservative. Why are you so concerned about participation criteria for the conservative subreddit, one of the only distinctly right wing places on the whole platform?

The /r/conservative subreddit is unpopular among actual conservatives because it’s basically a propaganda outlet for the mods. You can get banned for posting traditional conservative opinions there if they go against the message the mods want to allow, even if it’s conservative. Don’t be tricked into thinking it’s some conservative safe space. It’s a propaganda outlet for the mods who ban even conservatives if they d…

Do you have examples? I wouldn't say it never happened, but a repeatable pattern should be easy to see.

Re: A competitor crippled a $23.5M bootcamp by becoming a Reddit moderator

#899

Post by mlrtime »

prox wrote: post #562
user34283 wrote: post #531

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you think "any thread there" is that absurd, you are clearly not a conservative at all. You are another liberal ranting about /r/conservative, are you not? It is in my opinion a very weak argument to point at /r/conservative specifically as an example for how the mainstream censorship on Reddit is not overwhelmingly liberal.

You are making a straw man fallacy. It’s not both all the other subs, the point under contention is about that you cannot be critical or reasonably discuss anything proper in r/conservative. I don’t know if you have been following the sub, I have, and it always follows a similar pattern. If it’s a new topic, some discussion is allowed, but soon everyone needs to toe the party line. Edit : I encourage free discussion…

You are comparing one sub vs most all of reddit that touches politics. Reddit demographics is extremely liberal and anti-trump. This bleeds into so many subreddits that I participate in that have 0 to do with politics or Trump.

Re: A competitor crippled a $23.5M bootcamp by becoming a Reddit moderator

#900

Post by mlrtime »

jacquesm wrote: post #862
WillPostForFood wrote: post #804

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again you are speaking from ignorance, and the inability to differentiate online bubble talk, shit talking by politicians, and reality. The Candian PM was sitting in the White House laughing with the president two days ago, are you seriously saying there is some sort of invasion threat? I don't like that twitter shit talking has bled into people's actual mouths, but I am capable of understanding that it is just talk.…

> Again you are speaking from ignorance, and the inability to differentiate online bubble talk, shit talking by politicians, and reality. The Candian PM was sitting in the White House laughing with the president two days ago, are you seriously saying there is some sort of invasion threat? I don't like that twitter shit talking has bled into people's actual mouths, but I am capable of understanding that it is just tal…

>The rest of the world - so outside of your bubble - hears that talk and is getting seriously worries. Not just about the leadership of the USA, but about the USA as a whole.

Propaganda, Anxiety, none of it is real. Parent is right, its made up outrage and the US and world is better now than ever.

The only thing that is extreme is the hate spewed by both sides.

Post reply on HN