3 ms·

The counterargument is that loopholes in the mechanics allowed the community in question to artificially limit the impact of everyone else's favorite platform o

by ajkjk 10y ago

The counterargument is that loopholes in the mechanics allowed the community in question to artificially limit the impact of everyone else's favorite platform of free expression. The charitable view is to call what's being done a bandaid to fix a broken mechanic. It's also not an understatement to say that the level of rule-breaking (doxxing, vote brigading, abuse, etc) from the community, sanctioned (or at least not nearly adequately curtailed) by its moderators, is probably justifiably grounds for banning the whole community (since it's failing to self-moderate) but that can't really happen because it would cause a much larger and more problematic fallout. The last sentence of your comment is ignorant and needlessly incendiary. I'm sure you'll find that the people you're talking about probably do know what it means. You can disagree with "people who identify as liberals but argue for different actions based on their best judgment than you do" (and there's plenty of fruitful discussions and arguments to be had around those judgments), without snidely saying that they're ignorant schmucks who've lost track of their purpose.

volak 10y ago
As a liberal - its been my view to respect and fight for anyone's right to say whatever they want, regardless of my own views. If there are bugs with the reddit platform that are being exploited, there would be no reason to "prevent stickied posts from showing on r/all"
- ajkjk 10y ago
  It's pretty clearly explained in Spez's post that it's a loophole, not a bug. The loophole is that there's an override for how sticky posts show in /all, used to elevate topical events -- which was being abused, against the spirit of the override, by pretty much only that one subreddit, for different purposes. There is probably a technical solution to this but it's probably complicated and this bandaid gets the job done for now. But I think you knew that.
  - volak 10y ago
    The bandaid was to allow people to filter subs themselves (which is great). Writing code to target a specific community crosses the line
    - ajkjk 10y ago
      I disagree. I don't think it crosses the line. But that's a value judgment, I guess, so there's not a lot of point arguing it out. I especially think it was acceptable because it solves the urgent problem with a quick solution, whereas a technical solution would take a lot longer, and I do strongly believe that the problem was very urgent.
      - volak 10y ago
        Trouble is that too is your opinion. As a frequent of r/all after the first TD purge I see 2-3 TD links there a day. Nothing so outrageous. It kind of bothers me that people let companies like facebook, twitter, google, reddit, etc push their agendas and bury conservative news. Recent data suggests facebook "fake news" alone could have swung the election. Social media being the primary source of news these days. I'm all for these platforms having the right the police their own site - but they have to be open and honest about it. Otherwise you end up with conspiracy theories going viral making one side super pissed and willing to elect Donald Trump over the beneficiary of what they perceive massive conspiracy to silence people.
        ajkjk 10y ago
        I think it's a bit of a stretch to say this is burying conservative news, it's more like burying conservative meme-spamming. Especially because, well, now TD is going to be able to get on the page the same way every other subreddit normally does, which seems.. almost.. fair? Certainly if you turn your head one way it's fair. It's not inherently discriminatory for one-of-two political camps to have behavior that breaks the intended functionality of a platform and necessitates a response. You can argue that in this case it was, and that's fine, but I disagree. Would it appease you if r/politics or a hillary subreddit had the same treatment? It wouldn't change anything but at least it would 'feel better'? And I'd like to point out that one reason I'm defending spez and the reddit admins on this is that I think they've been extremely open and honest about it (barring the one idiotic mistake of Spez's). I like the guy because his admin posts have none of the veneer of bullshit that literally-every-CEO's has (ie Zuckerberg's "our mission is to bring the world together" drivel). It's super candid; he answers every question, even the sensitive ones; he's very open about mistakes and changes and motivations. It's rare for a company to display it and I value it highly. I totally agree that doing special-case stuff to a community already obsessed with conspiracy theories about censorship is maybe a bad move, but I also think it's justifiable and probably justified. And also, there are tons of worse moves, in the game of not-pissing-everyone-off, in a generally shitty situation (such as banning the whole subreddit).

by ajkjk 10y ago

volak 10y ago

As a liberal - its been my view to respect and fight for anyone's right to say whatever they want, regardless of my own views. If there are bugs with the reddit platform that are being exploited, there would be no reason to "prevent stickied posts from showing on r/all"

ajkjk 10y ago
It's pretty clearly explained in Spez's post that it's a loophole, not a bug. The loophole is that there's an override for how sticky posts show in /all, used to elevate topical events -- which was being abused, against the spirit of the override, by pretty much only that one subreddit, for different purposes. There is probably a technical solution to this but it's probably complicated and this bandaid gets the job done for now. But I think you knew that.
- volak 10y ago
  The bandaid was to allow people to filter subs themselves (which is great). Writing code to target a specific community crosses the line
  - ajkjk 10y ago
    I disagree. I don't think it crosses the line. But that's a value judgment, I guess, so there's not a lot of point arguing it out. I especially think it was acceptable because it solves the urgent problem with a quick solution, whereas a technical solution would take a lot longer, and I do strongly believe that the problem was very urgent.
    - volak 10y ago
      Trouble is that too is your opinion. As a frequent of r/all after the first TD purge I see 2-3 TD links there a day. Nothing so outrageous. It kind of bothers me that people let companies like facebook, twitter, google, reddit, etc push their agendas and bury conservative news. Recent data suggests facebook "fake news" alone could have swung the election. Social media being the primary source of news these days. I'm all for these platforms having the right the police their own site - but they have to be open and honest about it. Otherwise you end up with conspiracy theories going viral making one side super pissed and willing to elect Donald Trump over the beneficiary of what they perceive massive conspiracy to silence people.
      - ajkjk 10y ago
        I think it's a bit of a stretch to say this is burying conservative news, it's more like burying conservative meme-spamming. Especially because, well, now TD is going to be able to get on the page the same way every other subreddit normally does, which seems.. almost.. fair? Certainly if you turn your head one way it's fair. It's not inherently discriminatory for one-of-two political camps to have behavior that breaks the intended functionality of a platform and necessitates a response. You can argue that in this case it was, and that's fine, but I disagree. Would it appease you if r/politics or a hillary subreddit had the same treatment? It wouldn't change anything but at least it would 'feel better'? And I'd like to point out that one reason I'm defending spez and the reddit admins on this is that I think they've been extremely open and honest about it (barring the one idiotic mistake of Spez's). I like the guy because his admin posts have none of the veneer of bullshit that literally-every-CEO's has (ie Zuckerberg's "our mission is to bring the world together" drivel). It's super candid; he answers every question, even the sensitive ones; he's very open about mistakes and changes and motivations. It's rare for a company to display it and I value it highly. I totally agree that doing special-case stuff to a community already obsessed with conspiracy theories about censorship is maybe a bad move, but I also think it's justifiable and probably justified. And also, there are tons of worse moves, in the game of not-pissing-everyone-off, in a generally shitty situation (such as banning the whole subreddit).