6 ms·

There was a recent /r/science article that suggested the banning of coontown and fatpeoplehate resulted in less hate on the platform as a whole. Would you argu

There was a recent /r/science article that suggested the banning of coontown and fatpeoplehate resulted in less hate on the platform as a whole. Would you argue this hate moved to other avenues of the web? I'd bet some of it did, but some people just stopped being so hateful on the internet once their cesspool went away. https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/6zg6w6/reddits_bans_of_rcoontown_and_rfatpeoplehate/ https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/6zg6w6/reddits_ban...

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
katastic 9y ago
It's conflation to compare coontown with the_donald. Go there right now. You won't find "kill the jews" posts. You won't find "kill the gays/black people" posts. You'll find a ton of supportive people with a particular worldview--and there's nothing wrong with that. If you assume the people you disagree with are "insane" or disregard them as "full of hate" then you'll never understand why they think the way they do and the division in our world continues unabated. It still blows my mind that people who support the currently elected president, are considered a hate group. If the other candidate had won, would we consider her subreddit a hate sub? Would we care what the losing party thought about her subreddit? We all know the answer to that: "No." I have never before seen an election where "only one candidate is considered a human being." Strange times.
- neuronexmachina 9y ago
  I was curious and peeked over to see what's currently popular over at the_donald. Some of the top-voted recent links: * "UN Globalists are on suicide watch after President Trump's speech" * "One of the best quotes of the speech. Socialist cucks BTFO!" * "This tweet from David Brock's cucks is less than 2 weeks old and has already aged terribly." * "Can you imagine a world without Islam?" * "HE TRULY IS A GOD AMONG MEN" (God-Emperor Trump) * "Since 9/11 there have been ~35,000 deadly Islamic terror attacks; that's an average of 2,000 per year... So let's (A) NEVER FORGET, (B) PRESS F, and (C) DRIVE. THEM. OUT. FROM. THE. EARTH!"
  - katastic 9y ago
    Bill Maher, once heralded as an extreme left liberal (who supported gay marriage and marijuana legalization in the early 90's when nobody thought either would ever happen), consistently talks about the "threat of Islam to democracy". Is he a neocon now? And should we remove his speech to "reduce hate" the same way you're suggesting the_donald be removed?
    - viraptor 9y ago
      You pivoted away from the topic. Bill Maher case may be interesting to discuss, but doesn't change whether the_donald calls for hate. Which actually looking at the subreddit shows it does.
      - katastic 9y ago
        Not at all. Which is the hate? Either Bill Maher (a liberal hero) is a racist islamaphobe, or, the_donald users who share the same views as him... aren't islamaphobes. Because unless we're not talking about Islamaphobia, what else did you actually see that could be considered "hateful"? Because on that same sub you'll find people of all colors, and most religions discussing things. You'll find legal immigrants. You'll find ex-Muslims and atheists. You'll find gays. You'll find women. You'll find Brits. You'll find lifelong Democrats and Libertarians. You'll find ex-"Bernie Bros" who were furious at the DNC's betrayal of Bernie Sanders. You'll find people who grew up under Communist rule. I know, because I've seen every single one of those on that sub and almost every one of those demographics has posted a picture of themselves with a MAGA hat at one point or another. If you want an actual white supremacist sub, you're thinking of /r/uncensorednews which actually lists Jews with (((triple parenthesis))). That's a pretty sharp contrast to the_donald. But it wouldn't be, if the_donald was as hateful as been claimed.
        viraptor 9y ago
        You can always find a worse place. There are places worse than 4chan too, but I don't see how that's relevant to the_donald being hate filled / fuelled. There's islamophobia, there's cherry picking of news about rape claims, infowars crap about illegal immigrants which is just hate mongering, posts like "let's trigger illegals and show some love for our ICE agents". I'm not going to link to that dump specifically because they don't deserve the publicity. If you don't see this as hate mongering, we disagree on a very fundamental level.
- krastanov 9y ago
  I frequently hear that defense of the_donald subreddit, but it seems not to be backed by facts. Yes, it is extremely important not to dehumanize our political opponents and to understand all the terrible things that made people be disillusioned with the establishment and vote for Trump. But the_donald community is definitely extreme in their fundamentalism, way beyond just being supportive of Trump's political agenda. Looking at their front page does actually show islamophobic and sexists posts and frequent calls/cheers to violence, contrary to your claims.
- s73ver_ 9y ago
  "It's conflation to compare coontown with the_donald. Go there right now. You won't find "kill the jews" posts. You won't find "kill the gays/black people" posts. You'll find a ton of supportive people with a particular worldview--and there's nothing wrong with that." Go read the comments. You will find plenty of that stuff. "If the other candidate had won, would we consider her subreddit a hate sub?" False equivalence. I don't recall Clinton ever saying she wanted to jail her political opponent. I don't recall her campaign ever retweeting literal white supremacists.
  - Simon_says 9y ago
    > I don't recall Clinton ever saying she wanted to jail her political opponent. This part isn't really fair. If I want to jail my political opponent because she's my political opponent, this is a big problem, but if I want to jail her because she's committed crimes, that's perfectly fine.
    - zimpenfish 9y ago
      > if I want to jail her because she's committed crimes Except, as many, many investigations have proven over many, many years, she hasn't. Hence it largely being a dogwhistle for... > [wanting] to jail my political opponent because she's my political opponent
      - Simon_says 9y ago
        I don't have a dog in the fight either way. I dislike Democrats and Republicans alike. There's enough publicly available evidence that she mishandled classified documents. If I did that, they'd lock me up and throw away the key. It flabergasts me that otherwise reasonable people can say what you're saying. Is it confirmation bias? Is it a media that while rarely outright lying, just avoids mentioning anti-Clinton facts? How?
        zimpenfish 9y ago
        > There's enough publicly available evidence that she mishandled classified documents. In the same way that many people did before her and in the same way that people continue to do now. Are you proposing to prosecute everyone the same way? Why is it suddenly an issue when HRC is doing it but not when Gowdy and Chaffetz do it? Or when almost the entire Trump administration is doing it? Or when the Bush administration "lost" 50M emails they were supposed to have kept? Hint: If you only have a problem with it when HRC does it, you probably want to check your sexism and misogyny settings.
wutbrodo 9y ago
> resulted in less hate on the platform as a whole The study is interesting, but this is decidedly not what it says, and you should be wary of overinterpreting its arguments. If you look at the definition of hate speech they used, it was defined as "the vocabulary of the subreddits in question". This isn't a general complaint about hate speech being slippery and hard to pin down, it's a criticism of the fact that defining it as the specific vocabulary of the subreddits in question is a huge confounder. What the study's conclusion boils down to is: "If you ban a subreddit, the exact vocabulary (in-jokes, etc) of that subreddit declines." Well, duh. This is an especially tautological result for communities that have such a rich vocabulary of in-jokes (and slurs) :( There's not much in the paper to suggest that the emigrants from coontown and FPH aren't expressing the exact same ideas elsewhere, without using the exact same lexicon that they developed in their original communities. I would be surprised if this result didn't replicate for pretty miuch any community that has its own internal vocabulary and in-jokes, such as nominally pro-social-justice subreddits or even narrow political subreddits like /r/anarchism or something.
KGIII 9y ago
You should visit voat.co and see where they went. It's pretty much a wretched hive of scum and villainy.
s73ver_ 9y ago
From the POV of Reddit, their users, and their advertisers, does it matter? It's not there anymore, so they're good.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

katastic 9y ago

It's conflation to compare coontown with the_donald. Go there right now. You won't find "kill the jews" posts. You won't find "kill the gays/black people" posts. You'll find a ton of supportive people with a particular worldview--and there's nothing wrong with that. If you assume the people you disagree with are "insane" or disregard them as "full of hate" then you'll never understand why they think the way they do and the division in our world continues unabated. It still blows my mind that people who support the currently elected president, are considered a hate group. If the other candidate had won, would we consider her subreddit a hate sub? Would we care what the losing party thought about her subreddit? We all know the answer to that: "No." I have never before seen an election where "only one candidate is considered a human being." Strange times.

neuronexmachina 9y ago
I was curious and peeked over to see what's currently popular over at the_donald. Some of the top-voted recent links: * "UN Globalists are on suicide watch after President Trump's speech" * "One of the best quotes of the speech. Socialist cucks BTFO!" * "This tweet from David Brock's cucks is less than 2 weeks old and has already aged terribly." * "Can you imagine a world without Islam?" * "HE TRULY IS A GOD AMONG MEN" (God-Emperor Trump) * "Since 9/11 there have been ~35,000 deadly Islamic terror attacks; that's an average of 2,000 per year... So let's (A) NEVER FORGET, (B) PRESS F, and (C) DRIVE. THEM. OUT. FROM. THE. EARTH!"
- katastic 9y ago
  Bill Maher, once heralded as an extreme left liberal (who supported gay marriage and marijuana legalization in the early 90's when nobody thought either would ever happen), consistently talks about the "threat of Islam to democracy". Is he a neocon now? And should we remove his speech to "reduce hate" the same way you're suggesting the_donald be removed?
  - viraptor 9y ago
    You pivoted away from the topic. Bill Maher case may be interesting to discuss, but doesn't change whether the_donald calls for hate. Which actually looking at the subreddit shows it does.
    - katastic 9y ago
      Not at all. Which is the hate? Either Bill Maher (a liberal hero) is a racist islamaphobe, or, the_donald users who share the same views as him... aren't islamaphobes. Because unless we're not talking about Islamaphobia, what else did you actually see that could be considered "hateful"? Because on that same sub you'll find people of all colors, and most religions discussing things. You'll find legal immigrants. You'll find ex-Muslims and atheists. You'll find gays. You'll find women. You'll find Brits. You'll find lifelong Democrats and Libertarians. You'll find ex-"Bernie Bros" who were furious at the DNC's betrayal of Bernie Sanders. You'll find people who grew up under Communist rule. I know, because I've seen every single one of those on that sub and almost every one of those demographics has posted a picture of themselves with a MAGA hat at one point or another. If you want an actual white supremacist sub, you're thinking of /r/uncensorednews which actually lists Jews with (((triple parenthesis))). That's a pretty sharp contrast to the_donald. But it wouldn't be, if the_donald was as hateful as been claimed.
      - viraptor 9y ago
        You can always find a worse place. There are places worse than 4chan too, but I don't see how that's relevant to the_donald being hate filled / fuelled. There's islamophobia, there's cherry picking of news about rape claims, infowars crap about illegal immigrants which is just hate mongering, posts like "let's trigger illegals and show some love for our ICE agents". I'm not going to link to that dump specifically because they don't deserve the publicity. If you don't see this as hate mongering, we disagree on a very fundamental level.
krastanov 9y ago
I frequently hear that defense of the_donald subreddit, but it seems not to be backed by facts. Yes, it is extremely important not to dehumanize our political opponents and to understand all the terrible things that made people be disillusioned with the establishment and vote for Trump. But the_donald community is definitely extreme in their fundamentalism, way beyond just being supportive of Trump's political agenda. Looking at their front page does actually show islamophobic and sexists posts and frequent calls/cheers to violence, contrary to your claims.
s73ver_ 9y ago
"It's conflation to compare coontown with the_donald. Go there right now. You won't find "kill the jews" posts. You won't find "kill the gays/black people" posts. You'll find a ton of supportive people with a particular worldview--and there's nothing wrong with that." Go read the comments. You will find plenty of that stuff. "If the other candidate had won, would we consider her subreddit a hate sub?" False equivalence. I don't recall Clinton ever saying she wanted to jail her political opponent. I don't recall her campaign ever retweeting literal white supremacists.
- Simon_says 9y ago
  > I don't recall Clinton ever saying she wanted to jail her political opponent. This part isn't really fair. If I want to jail my political opponent because she's my political opponent, this is a big problem, but if I want to jail her because she's committed crimes, that's perfectly fine.
  - zimpenfish 9y ago
    > if I want to jail her because she's committed crimes Except, as many, many investigations have proven over many, many years, she hasn't. Hence it largely being a dogwhistle for... > [wanting] to jail my political opponent because she's my political opponent
    - Simon_says 9y ago
      I don't have a dog in the fight either way. I dislike Democrats and Republicans alike. There's enough publicly available evidence that she mishandled classified documents. If I did that, they'd lock me up and throw away the key. It flabergasts me that otherwise reasonable people can say what you're saying. Is it confirmation bias? Is it a media that while rarely outright lying, just avoids mentioning anti-Clinton facts? How?
      - zimpenfish 9y ago
        > There's enough publicly available evidence that she mishandled classified documents. In the same way that many people did before her and in the same way that people continue to do now. Are you proposing to prosecute everyone the same way? Why is it suddenly an issue when HRC is doing it but not when Gowdy and Chaffetz do it? Or when almost the entire Trump administration is doing it? Or when the Bush administration "lost" 50M emails they were supposed to have kept? Hint: If you only have a problem with it when HRC does it, you probably want to check your sexism and misogyny settings.

wutbrodo 9y ago

> resulted in less hate on the platform as a whole The study is interesting, but this is decidedly not what it says, and you should be wary of overinterpreting its arguments. If you look at the definition of hate speech they used, it was defined as "the vocabulary of the subreddits in question". This isn't a general complaint about hate speech being slippery and hard to pin down, it's a criticism of the fact that defining it as the specific vocabulary of the subreddits in question is a huge confounder. What the study's conclusion boils down to is: "If you ban a subreddit, the exact vocabulary (in-jokes, etc) of that subreddit declines." Well, duh. This is an especially tautological result for communities that have such a rich vocabulary of in-jokes (and slurs) :( There's not much in the paper to suggest that the emigrants from coontown and FPH aren't expressing the exact same ideas elsewhere, without using the exact same lexicon that they developed in their original communities. I would be surprised if this result didn't replicate for pretty miuch any community that has its own internal vocabulary and in-jokes, such as nominally pro-social-justice subreddits or even narrow political subreddits like /r/anarchism or something.

KGIII 9y ago

You should visit voat.co and see where they went. It's pretty much a wretched hive of scum and villainy.

s73ver_ 9y ago

From the POV of Reddit, their users, and their advertisers, does it matter? It's not there anymore, so they're good.