Comment by alexanderwales on 16/07/2015 at 20:25 UTC

466 upvotes, 22 direct replies (showing 22)

View submission: Let's talk content. AMA.

View parent comment

But you haven't clearly spelled out the rules. What does this:

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

Even mean? It seems totally subjective.

Replies

Comment by BellyFullOfSwans at 16/07/2015 at 20:51 UTC

18 upvotes, 0 direct replies

Downvotes are the surest way to silence someone and that system is abused and used incorrectly in most of the subreddits on this site.

As for "doing harm"....with all do respect, how does a "rape threat" hurt more than a "fat joke" if both are between strangers in different states having an internet fight. The guy from California really CANT rape the guy from New York, so it is a nonsensical threat (although clearly in bad taste). The guy from California might not even be fat, so the insult would mean more or less to him depending on how accurate the WORDS were from the internet stranger from New York.

Still, we are going to have mods and admins working on the letter of the law here and defining who was "hurt" in these situations. Of course neither party was hurt by internet words....or of course BOTH were "hurt and harassed" if he use a SJW mindest or definition.

How will these subjective rules be enforced surrounding subjective words? Subjectively.

Comment by Toponlap at 16/07/2015 at 20:39 UTC

55 upvotes, 2 direct replies

Many subs like /r/cringe and /r/cringepics should be banned by that logic then. You can't just go around banning half of Reddit when its not specific.

Comment by caltheon at 16/07/2015 at 20:39 UTC

12 upvotes, 1 direct replies

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

This means they can ban damn near anything offensive they want. Think fat people are stupid, that's harassment. Think Monsanto is evil because of their shady business practices, BAN (assuming they are advertising or related to a partner company). It's carte blanche.

Comment by [deleted] at 16/07/2015 at 20:39 UTC

4 upvotes, 0 direct replies

From the reply before the one you replied to: "I think we have an intuitive sense of what this means, but before we release an official update to our policy we will spell this out as precisely as possible."

Comment by InevitableAngel at 16/07/2015 at 20:31 UTC

24 upvotes, 1 direct replies

But you haven't clearly spelled out the rules.

I think that's the purpose of this AMA, to get feedback from reddit and develop clearer rules.

Comment by [deleted] at 16/07/2015 at 21:06 UTC

2 upvotes, 0 direct replies

I think the point is that it's entirely subjective. They can't be accused of overstepping their own rules if we don't even really know what their rules are

Comment by I_give_karma_to_men at 16/07/2015 at 20:34 UTC

6 upvotes, 0 direct replies

Did you even read the post before that one? It was clearly stated that rules would be spelled out before the official policy change.

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

3 upvotes, 1 direct replies

If peoples feelings get hurt, they will ban the subreddit. It's exactly what they did to fatpeoplehate.

Comment by skedoosh1414 at 16/07/2015 at 20:32 UTC

-2 upvotes, 1 direct replies

Very good question, and that's one of the things we need to be clear about. I think we have an intuitive sense of what this means (e.g. death threats, inciting rape), but before we release an official update to our policy we will spell this out as precisely as possible.

They are *going* to spell it out

Comment by iismitch55 at 16/07/2015 at 23:39 UTC

1 upvotes, 0 direct replies

Sounds to me that they are still working on that. Hopefully they will release the full text of the policy change for the community to review before implementing it.

Comment by MaunaLoona at 17/07/2015 at 04:35 UTC

1 upvotes, 0 direct replies

behaviors intimidate others into silence

So, ban downvoting? When my comment gets downvoted I feel intimidated.

Comment by HaikuberryFin at 16/07/2015 at 21:08 UTC

1 upvotes, 0 direct replies

Comment by BenAdaephonDelat at 16/07/2015 at 20:54 UTC

1 upvotes, 0 direct replies

That's why he's doing an AMA. To get feedback before they spell out the rules.

Comment by Spoonner at 16/07/2015 at 20:51 UTC

-1 upvotes, 0 direct replies

Well, of course it's subjective. You can't possibly think it reasonable to try and create a policy that covers LITERALLY EVERY scenario. The more strings you add, the more loopholes you create. Look at tax law, with it's fucking gigantic tomes of rules and regulations, and people STILL get around them.

Not to go off on a tangent, but one of the reasons the American Constitution is so cool is because it's decidedly vague, and designed to be added upon. The founding fathers knew that they wouldn't be able to understand every future situation, so they created a document that was able to adapt to the world around it. I think that, the idea anyway, is a very good one.

Comment by aeonstrife at 16/07/2015 at 20:43 UTC

-5 upvotes, 1 direct replies

Do you want him to literally list everything that falls under those categories? Do we really need to be told explicitly how to not act like total sociopaths?

I honestly think human intuition is enough to judge it from both directions. Anything that is obviously harassment should be clear. Anything that is obviously overreacted to as harassment should be clear as well though. Anything that might be on the fence should lead to open discussion about it.

Comment by [deleted] at 16/07/2015 at 20:50 UTC

1 upvotes, 1 direct replies

[deleted]

Comment by arkofcovenant at 16/07/2015 at 21:08 UTC

0 upvotes, 0 direct replies

Exactly this. There's a big difference between "I'm afraid to say anything because I don't like it when 1000 people yell at me that I'm wrong" and "I'm afraid to say anything because I don't like it when 1000 people yell that they are going to find me and rape me to death"

Comment by armrha at 16/07/2015 at 20:53 UTC

0 upvotes, 0 direct replies

It's really not. When you organize mass email campaigns to try to shut someone up, that's clearly harassment. When you follow users around spamming them and trying to turn every discussion into an attack on them, that's harassment. Just act respectfully.

Comment by [deleted] at 16/07/2015 at 21:05 UTC

1 upvotes, 0 direct replies

It's meant to be

Comment by Poof_ace at 16/07/2015 at 20:52 UTC

0 upvotes, 0 direct replies

Maybe you should give an example of something to which you couldn't judge based on those guidelines instead of repeating everyone's question

Comment by FartingSunshine at 16/07/2015 at 23:16 UTC

0 upvotes, 0 direct replies

They are trying to be as vague as possible so that /r/shitredditsays can always considered not to be in violation. Period.

Comment by _myredditaccount_ at 16/07/2015 at 20:30 UTC

-1 upvotes, 2 direct replies

Really?