6 ms·

There's a vocal contingent of alt-right Donald Trump supporters that think this is a big deal.

by iaw 10y ago

legodt 10y ago
In the future, please wind down the usage of soft euphemisms like "alt right" and instead refer to the group by its proper name- neo-nazis.
- MustardTiger 10y ago
  Don't go lumping us in with the alt-right. We're not even right wing.
- dracht 10y ago
  Can we start referring to social justice warriors/feminists as Marxists too, or should we only vilify groups you don't agree with?
  - andybak 10y ago
    Is 'Marxist' simply a term of abuse now? When I did Sociology is was perfectly respectable school of thought that was studied and discussed.
  - vidarh 10y ago
    If applied to social justice warriors or feminists who actually are Marxists, then sure. Personally I don't think you'll find nearly many Marxists there as you'll find self-processed nazis amongst the "alt-right".
- Programmatic 10y ago
  In a venn diagram of neo-nazi's and alt-right, I'm sure there would be plenty of overlap, if not neo-nazi's being a subset of the alt-right. But to categorize the entirety of alt-right as neo-nazis is itself not useful, as you can then not have a conversation about the actual viewpoints of the alt-right. I'm really disappointed in the quality of the discourse on both sides this election cycle. Straw men abound.
  - legodt 10y ago
    What? The alt right us built os racism, misogyny, and white nationalism. This isn't some sweeping generalization like "all Trump voters are Nazis" or something like that, the alt right is built on fascist, neo-nazi ideals.
    - Programmatic 10y ago
      I'll admit that I was apparently ignorant on the topic and had a misunderstanding of the ideals of the alt-right. After reading for a while, I have come to a similar conclusion given the idea(l)s of NPI, Spencer, and so on. As with anything label-related, it's hard to determine who wears what label for what reasons and what elements of the label are made up by outsiders attempting to discredit the wearers of the label. But it is currently difficult to come to a conclusion other than yours given the facts I've been able to find. As a small aside, I still hold a small amount of hope given the history of inaccuracy in the media's portrayals of 4chan. Hopefully this is similarly overblown and hysterical...
gamechangr 10y ago
I think it's a big deal and I wouldn't be in the "alt-right" for sure. Having a CEO of a social media site impersonate users and censor comments calls into question the credibility of the their whole brand. That's not a partisan perspective??? How would you feel if Paul Graham of HN changed your comment to "I am strong supporter of the alt-right?" ...you wouldn't like that. Opposing opinions are fine - using admin priledges to put words to literally put words in users mouths is madness? I already made a comment elsewhere - but I'm surprised they haven't let him go. If reddit were a real company, they wouldn't tolerate that. I wonder what would happen if a middle manager started tampering with user comments - he would be gone.
- vidarh 10y ago
  As someone firmly left wing (by European standards), I agree. It may very well be that there are "alt-right" people blowing it out of proportion, but that doesn't mean it's not a big deal.
  - celticninja 10y ago
    It's not a big deal because it's reddit, a semi anonymous Internet board. It's not like he was editing legal statements.
    - zamalek 10y ago
      > It's not like he was editing legal statements. That is not the case.[1] [1]: http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/296680-house-panel-probes-web-rumor-on-clinton-emails http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/296680-house-pan...
    - vidarh 10y ago
      It's a big deal because he was making it seem like users had made statements they haven't made. Maybe these specific instances doesn't matter so much, but the fact he did it, and did it without leaving a visible sign it was edited creates an issue of trust. We now feel less safe that Reddit admins haven't done this in the past too, in cases where it matters more.
fit2rule 10y ago
Its definitely a big deal. Censorship of this issue is seriously bad news: Either we expose the pedophile rings in our governments, or we are subject to their will - and abuse of power - at every point. So, yeah. This is a huge breach of trust, and I hope that this story gets out there so that people can be informed while deciding whether to contribute to the reddit empire.
- crimsonalucard 10y ago
  It is a big deal, but it's not like it's anything new in modern society. Graphic images of war have been censored since Vietnam. So in other words, the mainstream media has been doing it for decades, how is reddit suppose to be better then the media?
  - gamechangr 10y ago
    It wasn't just "censored". He used his admin privileges to CHANGE users comments. Like if you made your last statement and then Paul Graham changed it to read "It's a huge deal, it's never happened before"...so that became YOUR USER COMMENT
    - celticninja 10y ago
      It's reddit for fucks sake, he didn't change a legal record. You are giving reddit comments too much credit for being a source of information.
      - ManlyBread 10y ago
        Can you give me access to your account so I can change what you wrote to whatever I like? It's just a HN comment after all, not a legal record.
- visarga 10y ago
  Forums censor their comments as a standard practice against trolling. But on the other hand, reddit is fully open and such attempts are easily found out by comparing older version to current version. So, people were saying "fuck /u/spez" (CEO's username), and he edited that.

There's a vocal contingent of alt-right Donald Trump supporters that think this is a big deal.

by iaw 10y ago

There's a vocal contingent of alt-right Donald Trump supporters that think this is a big deal.

In the future, please wind down the usage of soft euphemisms like "alt right" and instead refer to the group by its proper name- neo-nazis.

MustardTiger 10y ago
Don't go lumping us in with the alt-right. We're not even right wing.
dracht 10y ago
Can we start referring to social justice warriors/feminists as Marxists too, or should we only vilify groups you don't agree with?
- andybak 10y ago
  Is 'Marxist' simply a term of abuse now? When I did Sociology is was perfectly respectable school of thought that was studied and discussed.
- vidarh 10y ago
  If applied to social justice warriors or feminists who actually are Marxists, then sure. Personally I don't think you'll find nearly many Marxists there as you'll find self-processed nazis amongst the "alt-right".
Programmatic 10y ago
In a venn diagram of neo-nazi's and alt-right, I'm sure there would be plenty of overlap, if not neo-nazi's being a subset of the alt-right. But to categorize the entirety of alt-right as neo-nazis is itself not useful, as you can then not have a conversation about the actual viewpoints of the alt-right. I'm really disappointed in the quality of the discourse on both sides this election cycle. Straw men abound.
- legodt 10y ago
  What? The alt right us built os racism, misogyny, and white nationalism. This isn't some sweeping generalization like "all Trump voters are Nazis" or something like that, the alt right is built on fascist, neo-nazi ideals.
  - Programmatic 10y ago
    I'll admit that I was apparently ignorant on the topic and had a misunderstanding of the ideals of the alt-right. After reading for a while, I have come to a similar conclusion given the idea(l)s of NPI, Spencer, and so on. As with anything label-related, it's hard to determine who wears what label for what reasons and what elements of the label are made up by outsiders attempting to discredit the wearers of the label. But it is currently difficult to come to a conclusion other than yours given the facts I've been able to find. As a small aside, I still hold a small amount of hope given the history of inaccuracy in the media's portrayals of 4chan. Hopefully this is similarly overblown and hysterical...

gamechangr 10y ago

I think it's a big deal and I wouldn't be in the "alt-right" for sure. Having a CEO of a social media site impersonate users and censor comments calls into question the credibility of the their whole brand. That's not a partisan perspective??? How would you feel if Paul Graham of HN changed your comment to "I am strong supporter of the alt-right?" ...you wouldn't like that. Opposing opinions are fine - using admin priledges to put words to literally put words in users mouths is madness? I already made a comment elsewhere - but I'm surprised they haven't let him go. If reddit were a real company, they wouldn't tolerate that. I wonder what would happen if a middle manager started tampering with user comments - he would be gone.

vidarh 10y ago
As someone firmly left wing (by European standards), I agree. It may very well be that there are "alt-right" people blowing it out of proportion, but that doesn't mean it's not a big deal.
- celticninja 10y ago
  It's not a big deal because it's reddit, a semi anonymous Internet board. It's not like he was editing legal statements.
  - zamalek 10y ago
    > It's not like he was editing legal statements. That is not the case.[1] [1]: http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/296680-house-panel-probes-web-rumor-on-clinton-emails http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/296680-house-pan...
  - vidarh 10y ago
    It's a big deal because he was making it seem like users had made statements they haven't made. Maybe these specific instances doesn't matter so much, but the fact he did it, and did it without leaving a visible sign it was edited creates an issue of trust. We now feel less safe that Reddit admins haven't done this in the past too, in cases where it matters more.

fit2rule 10y ago

Its definitely a big deal. Censorship of this issue is seriously bad news: Either we expose the pedophile rings in our governments, or we are subject to their will - and abuse of power - at every point. So, yeah. This is a huge breach of trust, and I hope that this story gets out there so that people can be informed while deciding whether to contribute to the reddit empire.

crimsonalucard 10y ago
It is a big deal, but it's not like it's anything new in modern society. Graphic images of war have been censored since Vietnam. So in other words, the mainstream media has been doing it for decades, how is reddit suppose to be better then the media?
- gamechangr 10y ago
  It wasn't just "censored". He used his admin privileges to CHANGE users comments. Like if you made your last statement and then Paul Graham changed it to read "It's a huge deal, it's never happened before"...so that became YOUR USER COMMENT
  - celticninja 10y ago
    It's reddit for fucks sake, he didn't change a legal record. You are giving reddit comments too much credit for being a source of information.
    - ManlyBread 10y ago
      Can you give me access to your account so I can change what you wrote to whatever I like? It's just a HN comment after all, not a legal record.
visarga 10y ago
Forums censor their comments as a standard practice against trolling. But on the other hand, reddit is fully open and such attempts are easily found out by comparing older version to current version. So, people were saying "fuck /u/spez" (CEO's username), and he edited that.