527 upvotes, 6 direct replies (showing 6)
View submission: Let's talk content. AMA.
How will you determine what constitutes harassment?
Everyone knows why they left that vague.
Comment by hansjens47 at 16/07/2015 at 20:26 UTC
135 upvotes, 1 direct replies
Actually, I think we know exactly why they used that wording:
The EFF posted this about online harassment as a free speech issue
Alexis posted about that article here months ago
Comparing the two wordings, it's very clear where reddit took the wording they use.
Comment by TechnoSam_Belpois at 16/07/2015 at 21:54 UTC
3 upvotes, 0 direct replies
He did clarify later on that calling someone stupid in a public forum is not harassment. So at least what's being purported is probably fine. Let's see how that works out though.
I can't remember all the details, but wasn't someone in Canada recently tried for harassment *after* police found no evidence? All he had done was disagree with people. I'm not sure if I'm remembering that right though.
I'm really hoping reddit doesn't turn out like that.
Comment by szopin at 16/07/2015 at 20:15 UTC
178 upvotes, 5 direct replies
Stop harassing reddit's advertisers with your stupid questions
Comment by DannyInternets at 17/07/2015 at 11:43 UTC
2 upvotes, 0 direct replies
So they can use it to justify the removal of pretty much anything objected to by Reddit admins and sponsors?
Comment by TyceGN at 16/07/2015 at 23:10 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
Sounds they they intend on NOT leaving it vague. It was a point to discuss with the promise of clear and detailed guidelines.
Comment by IamtheCarl at 17/07/2015 at 02:42 UTC
0 upvotes, 0 direct replies
Because it's hard to define concisely, holistically, and specifically?