Comment by [deleted] on 16/07/2015 at 20:03 UTC

584 upvotes, 8 direct replies (showing 8)

View submission: Let's talk content. AMA.

You really need to clarify

Anything that harasses, bullies, or abuses an individual or group of people (these behaviors intimidate others into silence)

because that's rather vague and is very much open to interpretation (one person's definition of harassment is not necessarily another's - is it harassment just because one person says so?). To be honest, I see nothing here that's really new to the existing content policy outside of "the common decency opt in", which I'm probably ok with - that will depend on how it's implemented and what is classified as abhorrent.

Replies

Comment by SlackJawCretin at 16/07/2015 at 21:11 UTC

7 upvotes, 1 direct replies

My only qualm with that is, isn't that sort of already in place? There's several subs I find peronally offensive, so I don't subscript to those subs and never see them unless someone links for some reason. I guess there's a chance they could end up on the front page but I still have the option to not look at it.

Beyond that I'm less worried about WHAT is abhorrent, and more concerned about WHO decided it was abhorrent

Comment by Didalectic at 16/07/2015 at 20:27 UTC

2 upvotes, 1 direct replies

He said:

We'll consider banning subreddits that clearly violate the guidelines in my post--the ones that are illegal or cause harm to others.

Somehow excluding that guideline we clearly want clarified here. That and the fact that he doesn't have a list of subreddits that he wants to ban suggests he has come unprepared. This is going to be bad.

Comment by th8a_bara at 17/07/2015 at 03:50 UTC

1 upvotes, 0 direct replies

I think the reason why things like this are kept vague is because specifics can be excessive or can become irrelevant. You also risk having people "play the system", which effectively defeats the purpose of having a rule in place. You will never find a hard distinction between pornography and art because there is a greater grey area than there are hard examples of each. If harassment is explicitly outlined, it's likely going to be something unenforceable because it won't please everyone, or it could actually become a blatant hindrance to free speech. Be careful what you ask for. Ultimately, I think it's worth the cluster fuck to leave it vague and on a case by case basis.

Comment by spez at 16/07/2015 at 20:42 UTC

16 upvotes, 35 direct replies

Right. This isn't different from what we have right now, but we really need to enforce it better.

Comment by [deleted] at 16/07/2015 at 20:35 UTC*

3 upvotes, 2 direct replies

I hear they're planning to add a "This offends me"-button next to the report button.

Comment by PeregrineFury at 17/07/2015 at 01:37 UTC

1 upvotes, 0 direct replies

They won't clarify, they want it vague on purpose, that way they can use it as they please with no accountability. Because they're full of shit of course. Anything they don't like, or might make them lose money goes away.