5 ms·

Why the downvotes? The CEO did admit to committing such anti-user actions.

by talmand 10y ago

orf 10y ago
Because it wasn't censorship or oppression.
- throwanem 10y ago
  "Suppression" was the word used. But calling this action censorship or suppression is beside the point. It's one thing to prevent opinions one finds unsavory from being visible. Whatever one's own opinion on such activities, we can all agree that it's within the realm of what's reasonably permissible for a company that runs a site where others can comment. It's a quite different, and much more dangerous, thing to instead secretly modify comments expressing those opinions so that they say things other than the person who posted them actually wrote. In a purely legal sense, at least as far as I know, that's every bit as permissible as deleting such comments. In an ethical sense, they are nothing alike, and I don't think there is anything political in the statement that a company where someone has admitted engaging in such behavior, and not been immediately terminated as a direct result of it, merits extraordinary skepticism with regard to all its future doings.
minimaxir 10y ago
At best, it's off-topic.
- talmand 10y ago
  How is it off-topic in this thread?
  - jakebasile 10y ago
    It isn't. It's a relevant demonstration of how/why some users are very distrustful of Reddit's actions.
mullingitover 10y ago
If the users Spez trolled with his edits decided to leave reddit forever, it would only make reddit a better place.
- jonlucc 10y ago
  I agree, but there are other users who might not trust that their comments won't be invisibly altered. The specific incident is not very troubling, but the fact that it occurred at all is.
  - mullingitover 10y ago
    1. The altered comments were of zero value to the community 2. I've been on reddit for over ten years, and I have zero concern that reddit admins are altering r/askhistorians or other non-dumpster fire subs.
jakebasile 10y ago
It's being downvoted because the comment attempted to show empathy for people with different viewpoints. This cannot be allowed.
- epistasis 10y ago
  No, it was downvitre because it's inaccurate spin that is irrelevant to the conversation
  - jakebasile 10y ago
    Yeah, talking about how some users could distrust reddit in a comment chain about users not trusting reddit. Really off topic.
  - talmand 10y ago
    How is referring the actual fact the CEO admitted to such actions inaccurate spin?
    - epistasis 10y ago
      It wasn't about Trump at all, thus the spin, and introducing unnecessary politics. >It wasn't trump supporter comments, it was comments that said exactly "fuck spez." Misrepresenting it as "trump supporters" gives it a decidedly different, post-truth spin. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13124802 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13124802
      - jakebasile 10y ago
        The edited comments were on r/the_donald, and he changed them to point to r/the_donald moderators. You have to be doing some serious mental gymnastics to think that it wasn't against "those Trump supporters". And here's the thing: it doesn't matter. An admin of a site (the CEO even!) edited users' comments without permission, notification, or apparent consequence. This can lead to users distrusting the site.
JohnTHaller 10y ago
Because spez didn't alter 'Trump supporter comments'. That's a common misrepresentation from Trump supporters. spez edited reddit comments hostile towards him. Specifically, he changed comments that said "fuck spez" to "fuck r/The_Donald".

Why the downvotes? The CEO did admit to committing such anti-user actions.

by talmand 10y ago

Why the downvotes? The CEO did admit to committing such anti-user actions.

orf 10y ago

Because it wasn't censorship or oppression.

throwanem 10y ago
"Suppression" was the word used. But calling this action censorship or suppression is beside the point. It's one thing to prevent opinions one finds unsavory from being visible. Whatever one's own opinion on such activities, we can all agree that it's within the realm of what's reasonably permissible for a company that runs a site where others can comment. It's a quite different, and much more dangerous, thing to instead secretly modify comments expressing those opinions so that they say things other than the person who posted them actually wrote. In a purely legal sense, at least as far as I know, that's every bit as permissible as deleting such comments. In an ethical sense, they are nothing alike, and I don't think there is anything political in the statement that a company where someone has admitted engaging in such behavior, and not been immediately terminated as a direct result of it, merits extraordinary skepticism with regard to all its future doings.

minimaxir 10y ago

At best, it's off-topic.

talmand 10y ago
How is it off-topic in this thread?
- jakebasile 10y ago
  It isn't. It's a relevant demonstration of how/why some users are very distrustful of Reddit's actions.

mullingitover 10y ago

If the users Spez trolled with his edits decided to leave reddit forever, it would only make reddit a better place.

jonlucc 10y ago
I agree, but there are other users who might not trust that their comments won't be invisibly altered. The specific incident is not very troubling, but the fact that it occurred at all is.
- mullingitover 10y ago
  1. The altered comments were of zero value to the community 2. I've been on reddit for over ten years, and I have zero concern that reddit admins are altering r/askhistorians or other non-dumpster fire subs.

jakebasile 10y ago

It's being downvoted because the comment attempted to show empathy for people with different viewpoints. This cannot be allowed.

epistasis 10y ago
No, it was downvitre because it's inaccurate spin that is irrelevant to the conversation
- jakebasile 10y ago
  Yeah, talking about how some users could distrust reddit in a comment chain about users not trusting reddit. Really off topic.
- talmand 10y ago
  How is referring the actual fact the CEO admitted to such actions inaccurate spin?
  - epistasis 10y ago
    It wasn't about Trump at all, thus the spin, and introducing unnecessary politics. >It wasn't trump supporter comments, it was comments that said exactly "fuck spez." Misrepresenting it as "trump supporters" gives it a decidedly different, post-truth spin. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13124802 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13124802
    - jakebasile 10y ago
      The edited comments were on r/the_donald, and he changed them to point to r/the_donald moderators. You have to be doing some serious mental gymnastics to think that it wasn't against "those Trump supporters". And here's the thing: it doesn't matter. An admin of a site (the CEO even!) edited users' comments without permission, notification, or apparent consequence. This can lead to users distrusting the site.

JohnTHaller 10y ago

Because spez didn't alter 'Trump supporter comments'. That's a common misrepresentation from Trump supporters. spez edited reddit comments hostile towards him. Specifically, he changed comments that said "fuck spez" to "fuck r/The_Donald".