3 ms·

Nobody can agree on what "politically neutral" means, it's not a useful criterion. Every subreddit listed at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversial_Reddit

by zurn 9y ago

Nobody can agree on what "politically neutral" means, it's not a useful criterion. Every subreddit listed at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversial_Reddit_communities https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversial_Reddit_communiti... could be argued to be political and protected under "political neutrality".

koolba 9y ago
> Nobody can agree on what "politically neutral" means, it's not a useful criterion. It's pretty easy for a tech platform to be politically neutral. All you need are objective rules for how content "get to the top" and equal opportunity for whatever system is in place to be abused. That last one is the problem though. Regardless of which side is doing it, there's a sense of unfairness felt by the other side when they see the system get gamed. And it invariably will. Hence the knee jerk reaction to rebalance things, which leads to calls of bias from the other side, and the cycle continues. > Every subreddit listed at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversial_Reddit_communiti.. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversial_Reddit_communiti.... could be argued to be political and protected under "political neutrality". Do you seriously consider unconsenting upskirt photos of women[1] political speech? Not just, free speech, but specifically "political speech"? [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversial_Reddit_communities#CreepShots https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversial_Reddit_communiti...
- zurn 9y ago
  I think the "All you need are objective rules" part is just going to square one. > > Every subreddit listed at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversial_Reddit_communiti... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversial_Reddit_communiti.... could be argued to be political and protected under "political neutrality". > Do you seriously consider unconsenting upskirt photos of women[1] political speech? Not just, free speech, but specifically "political speech"? No, and I'd kindly ask you not to attribute such a position to me. But I'm willing to bet someone does think it's political speech. See also NAMBLA, etc. And consider that gay rights boosters would have been put in the same basket a while ago.
  - abiox 9y ago
    > No, and I'd kindly ask you not to attribute such a position to me. this happens when you're unclear with words or leave a lot of wiggle room. saying "[it] could be argued" and then suggesting you're unhappy with being associated with that position is a bit of a time waster.
- mozumder 9y ago
  Reddit isn't a "tech platform". It's an advertising-based media property, like a magazine or TV show.

by zurn 9y ago

koolba 9y ago

> Nobody can agree on what "politically neutral" means, it's not a useful criterion. It's pretty easy for a tech platform to be politically neutral. All you need are objective rules for how content "get to the top" and equal opportunity for whatever system is in place to be abused. That last one is the problem though. Regardless of which side is doing it, there's a sense of unfairness felt by the other side when they see the system get gamed. And it invariably will. Hence the knee jerk reaction to rebalance things, which leads to calls of bias from the other side, and the cycle continues. > Every subreddit listed at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversial_Reddit_communiti.. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversial_Reddit_communiti.... could be argued to be political and protected under "political neutrality". Do you seriously consider unconsenting upskirt photos of women[1] political speech? Not just, free speech, but specifically "political speech"? [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversial_Reddit_communities#CreepShots https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversial_Reddit_communiti...

zurn 9y ago
I think the "All you need are objective rules" part is just going to square one. > > Every subreddit listed at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversial_Reddit_communiti... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversial_Reddit_communiti.... could be argued to be political and protected under "political neutrality". > Do you seriously consider unconsenting upskirt photos of women[1] political speech? Not just, free speech, but specifically "political speech"? No, and I'd kindly ask you not to attribute such a position to me. But I'm willing to bet someone does think it's political speech. See also NAMBLA, etc. And consider that gay rights boosters would have been put in the same basket a while ago.
- abiox 9y ago
  > No, and I'd kindly ask you not to attribute such a position to me. this happens when you're unclear with words or leave a lot of wiggle room. saying "[it] could be argued" and then suggesting you're unhappy with being associated with that position is a bit of a time waster.
mozumder 9y ago
Reddit isn't a "tech platform". It's an advertising-based media property, like a magazine or TV show.