366 upvotes, 6 direct replies (showing 6)
View submission: Promote ideas, protect people
It's odd to have a post one day from admin's about transparency, and then the next day, have an entire new post which involves new rules that are nearly 100% opaque.
The definition of harassment is so vague as to be useless, as are the penalties.
Comment by fortified_concept at 14/05/2015 at 17:53 UTC*
117 upvotes, 1 direct replies
It was a preemptive strike to pretend they're transparent before screwing the userbase with completely vague rules that give the admins power to censor whoever they like or whichever group they like.
Comment by Kalium at 14/05/2015 at 18:04 UTC*
14 upvotes, 0 direct replies
The definition of harassment is so vague as to be useless, as are the penalties.
Often, that's the point of rules from the perspective of administrations. They give you enforcement ability and space to operate as you see fit while sharply limiting the ability of people to contest.
Taken to extremes, you get authoritarian nations where the law is whatever the current strongman says it is. In practice, you either wind up setting up pseudo-legal-systems that don't really satisfy users while being very inefficient or you rely on administration internal self-enforcement. Neither works perfectly.
Comment by thatshowitis at 14/05/2015 at 21:22 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
They're being transparent about how the decisions they make, the rules they enforce, and the subsequent results (shadowbanned for a "rule violation!") are not for us to know.
Comment by fre3k at 14/05/2015 at 23:41 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
To believe this shit requires absolute capacity for double-think.
Comment by disrdat at 15/05/2015 at 16:05 UTC
0 upvotes, 0 direct replies
You must not have completely read the first one. They straight up said that this here takes priority over everything else.
Comment by Huwbacca at 14/05/2015 at 21:13 UTC
-7 upvotes, 1 direct replies
I mean... that definition is pretty clear. What aspects of it are vague?