675 upvotes, 21 direct replies (showing 21)
View submission: IAMA reddit General Manager. AMA.
Personally I think they are gross. But let's take the infamous picsOfDeadkids example. The actual content of that subreddit is mostly autopsy photos. Obviously it's a troll subreddit and created to get a reaction, and I'd guess 98% of redditors think it's gross/offensive etc. But what if the name of the subreddit was /r/autopsyphotos or /r/doyoureallywanttogointocriminalforensics and they were sincere in their discussion of these images? Would some of that 98% now be ok with it? I would bet at least some would. What if it wasn't kids but adults? Or historical autopsy photos only? The point is I don't want to be the one making those decisions for anyone but myself, and it's not the business reddit is in. We're a free speech site with very few exceptions (mostly personal info) and having to stomach occasional troll reddit like picsofdeadkids or morally quesitonable reddits like jailbait are part of the price of free speech on a site like this.
Comment by websurfer1232 at 20/07/2011 at 23:44 UTC
15 upvotes, 1 direct replies
Is r/whalebait acceptable then?
Comment by Theon at 21/07/2011 at 16:19 UTC
2 upvotes, 1 direct replies
What about /r/whitepower? (Or whatever the name is)
Comment by hogimusPrime at 20/07/2011 at 21:46 UTC
11 upvotes, 1 direct replies
and having to stomach occasional troll reddit like picsofdeadkids or morally quesitonable reddits like jailbait
I don't even think the use of the phrase *have to* is accurate. Its like magic, if you don't want to look at something, for *whatever* reason, you, <gasp>, don't have to look at it. The beauty of the site is that if you *don't want to stomach* that type of stuff, you don't have to. In this way you (moderators, site owners) don't have to make judgement calls about what is appropriate or offensive for the entire user base in one grand sweep. Its almost like a clever and simple system whereby each person, according to his\her own personal tastes, can pick and choose what to view and what not to view. This aspect of the system is precisely why I don't understand the users who get all butt-hurt about something being on the site, or rant about how things have to be.
Comment by T____T at 20/07/2011 at 19:17 UTC
75 upvotes, 1 direct replies
Very well said.
Thank you for answering my question!
Comment by fartfacemcgee at 17/08/2011 at 02:57 UTC
5 upvotes, 0 direct replies
Okay, so what about a subreddit such as r/proana. r/proana, funnily enough, is "forbidden". Isn't "pro-ana" considered freedom of speech, or at the very least freedom of expression? It seems hypocritical to allow hate speech toward minority groups such as r/beatingwomen over a subreddit dedicated to those suffering with a disease.
Comment by PaulTheOctopus at 20/07/2011 at 19:20 UTC
55 upvotes, 4 direct replies
What about /r/spacedicks?
Comment by [deleted] at 10/08/2011 at 18:58 UTC
7 upvotes, 0 direct replies
Well the mods of the subreddit r/beatingwomen seem to be actively encouraging the beating of women, with texts like "Finish her!", "Get and give advice on what to do about back talk", "Some lessons on how to begin your wonderful life in the art of beating women! Good luck!" ...
I think encouraging illegal acts is illegal by itself in most developed countries. So: it's not just sharing pictures, there's actual encouragement for the act of beating women. How do you respond to that?
Comment by metalgrizzlycannon at 20/07/2011 at 20:06 UTC
17 upvotes, 0 direct replies
Comment by denne at 20/07/2011 at 23:31 UTC
4 upvotes, 1 direct replies
One could argue that once you say "We're a free speech site with very few exceptions" then you are no longer a free speech site. You're *mostly* a free speech site ;)
Comment by [deleted] at 20/07/2011 at 21:26 UTC
3 upvotes, 0 direct replies
What do you think of being subjected to smears because of that? I recall that happening a few times. Here's[1] an example.
Comment by DarkGamer at 11/10/2011 at 12:37 UTC
2 upvotes, 0 direct replies
having to stomach occasional troll reddit like picsofdeadkids or morally quesitonable reddits like jailbait are part of the price of free speech on a site like this.
So does this mean we no longer have free speech on a site like this?
Comment by jaxspider at 21/07/2011 at 00:09 UTC
2 upvotes, 0 direct replies
I want to welcome you to r/HumanPorn[1]. If I haven't already.
We are part of the EarthPorn family (BotanicalPorn too)
Comment by RedsforMeds at 20/07/2011 at 23:26 UTC
2 upvotes, 2 direct replies
We're a free speech site with very few exceptions (mostly personal info)
What are the other exceptions?
Comment by [deleted] at 21/07/2011 at 00:45 UTC
3 upvotes, 0 direct replies
That was a fantastic answer.
Comment by [deleted] at 20/07/2011 at 21:55 UTC
2 upvotes, 3 direct replies
Out of interest, what do you find gross about r/jailbait? The rules are pretty clear: No nipples, labia, etc and they must be 13, 14, 15, 16 or 17 or they aren't allowed. Now, I'm not one to look at pics of thirteen year old girls in that nature but it's only natural for you, as a man, to be aroused by, say, a seventeen year old girl with some lovely cleavage, if you are aroused by it.
Comment by ManWithoutModem at 20/07/2011 at 23:19 UTC
4 upvotes, 0 direct replies
What about /r/picsofdeadjailbait?
Comment by [deleted] at 21/07/2011 at 17:36 UTC
7 upvotes, 1 direct replies
[removed]
Comment by fazon at 20/07/2011 at 22:18 UTC
1 upvotes, 1 direct replies
Give this man a raise!
Comment by [deleted] at 20/07/2011 at 19:20 UTC
2 upvotes, 0 direct replies
Well put.
Comment by [deleted] at 21/07/2011 at 00:46 UTC
-8 upvotes, 1 direct replies
[deleted]
Comment by [deleted] at 21/07/2011 at 00:18 UTC*
-18 upvotes, 1 direct replies
It's great to see free speech = distribution of child pornography. Many times in r/jailbaitarchieves files are filled to the brim with naked kids. So my question is why is this subteddit around and do you like naked children, someone does for this subteddit to exist.