168 upvotes, 11 direct replies (showing 11)
View submission: Content Policy Update
It was gutsy to leave coontown be in their own quarantined place. Pao's "banning behavior not ideas" was simple to apply broadly. Your "banning ideas that make Reddit worse by offending" is a nightmare to apply broadly.
More than a practicality issue, there's an ethical one: free speech--a good rallying point for the front page of the internet--exists to protect unpopular ideas. Pao's policy sent the message that Reddit and the internet was firstly a vehicle for free speech. Your policy sends the message that Reddit is firstly a vehicle for victimhood--those that successfully argue themselves to be the biggest victims control content.
Comment by SireBelch at 05/08/2015 at 22:05 UTC
53 upvotes, 3 direct replies
But Coontown wasn't quarantined. It was banned. It's gone. Can't get to it. They snuffed it out the same way they did FPH.
Comment by [deleted] at 05/08/2015 at 22:25 UTC*
-4 upvotes, 3 direct replies
correct bag instinctive liquid elderly sort childlike ghost angle encouraging
Comment by [deleted] at 05/08/2015 at 22:37 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
I've been fine with every change up until this one.
Between 'making reddit worse' being just about the most subjective criteria you could choose and 'what the average schmuck finds offensive' being almost as easily abused (and actively stacking the deck/creating a positive feedback loop), these changes are clearly an excuse to give Reddit's owners carte blanche to do whatever they want.
Which isn't necessarily a problem in and of itself: it is their site to do with as they please. The problem is that it's disingenuous (at least have the balls to state 'we reserve the right to remove any content for any reason') and it is antithetical to creating a platform users can have confidence in. User confidence is already a big problem on this site between pervasive community moderation, deletion of content being invisible to OPs, and the long-standing issue of shadow-banning users. These changes only compound the existing problems for users and only benefit Reddit's business-side.
Comment by gooeyblob at 05/08/2015 at 22:03 UTC
-2 upvotes, 2 direct replies
Unpopular ideas are one thing, actively demeaning and degrading a whole race of people is another.
Comment by chomstar at 05/08/2015 at 23:16 UTC
0 upvotes, 0 direct replies
I feel like this argument removed the nuances of the situation. The spirit of free speech is to protect unpopular ideas, sure. But equating hate speech with unpopular ideas is entirely aside the spirit of free speech.
Comment by [deleted] at 05/08/2015 at 22:12 UTC
-3 upvotes, 0 direct replies
I agree with you, and I formed that same opinion when I saw the quarantine page.
The relevant part is ~~the how~~ where it says "Content in this community may be upsetting."
Caution: hurt feelings ahead
E: I forgot to say thanks for being better with your words than I could be, and for comparing this new turn of events with one from the recent past (pao) for objectivity.
Comment by nascentt at 05/08/2015 at 23:18 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
/r/coontown is currently banned
Comment by Cameronjpr at 06/08/2015 at 00:57 UTC
0 upvotes, 0 direct replies
Reddit isn't the front page of the Internet though. It sounds good as a tagline, but really it's not even close to being true. Can't wait to see how the new policy is doing a bit further down the line though.
Comment by kangareagle at 06/08/2015 at 04:56 UTC
0 upvotes, 0 direct replies
I don't see the ethical issue. Why does this company have an ethical obligation to allow anything they don't want on their site? They're not stopping you from starting your own site and say whatever you want.
Comment by [deleted] at 05/08/2015 at 21:40 UTC
-25 upvotes, 2 direct replies
[deleted]
Comment by TherealMarkNutt at 06/08/2015 at 00:13 UTC
0 upvotes, 0 direct replies
Free speech isn't a right guaranteed by companies and never will be and everyone needs to grow up and get over that.
