4 ms·

Correct me if I'm wrong and I read it wrong, but I think you're mixing up things here. > Users that have more than 500 karma in quarantined subreddits outside

Correct me if I'm wrong and I read it wrong, but I think you're mixing up things here. > Users that have more than 500 karma in quarantined subreddits outside of The Donald will not be allowed on the list of approved applicants [to be a moderator] This is only for being a moderator. Simply upvoting posts (that don't break any rules) in quarantined subreddits does not get you punished. > If the content that people are upvoting is bad enough to get banned over shouldn't it just be removed from the site and not left up to upvote? What ends up happening in this subreddit is that the bad content doesn't get reported/deleted, which is what leads to the subreddit being quarantined in the first place. The whole point of a quarantine is exactly to push people to report bad content, and acts as a warning. This new change makes sense as far as pushing people to report said content and not keep promoting it. I also don't think the content is being "left to be upvoted", but rather when found, they will retroactively flag anyone who upvoted it instead of reporting it. But the problem is that the content often doesn't get flagged/deleted until it gets to the top of the subreddit. This is the problem they are trying to fix with this change.

windyaskew 7y ago
This article [1] says they announced it today. I'm excited to see the fallout on this decision. [1] https://reclaimthenet.org/reddit-banned-for-upvote-policy/ https://reclaimthenet.org/reddit-banned-for-upvote-policy/
- kickopotomus 7y ago
  What would the fallout be? The collapse of quarantined communities? The policy only applies to individuals that consistently upvote policy-breaking[1] content within quarantined communities which is pretty clearly qualified. Those individuals will also receive a warning(s?) prior to being banned. Seems like a pretty fair policy all around seeing that upvoting is a conscious choice. [1]: https://www.redditinc.com/policies/content-policy https://www.redditinc.com/policies/content-policy
- ehsankia 7y ago
  The actual source is the Transparency report [0] from yesterday: > When we expanded our quarantine policy, we created an appeals process for sanctioned communities. One of the goals was to “force subscribers to reconsider their behavior and incentivize moderators to make changes.” While the policy attempted to hold moderators more accountable for enforcing healthier rules and norms, it didn’t address the role that each member plays in the health of their community. > Today, we’re making an update to address this gap: Users who consistently upvote policy-breaking content within quarantined communities will receive automated warnings, followed by further consequences like a temporary or permanent suspension. We hope this will encourage healthier behavior across these communities. Seems like their justification matches my guess in the parent post. [0] https://www.reddit.com/r/announcements/comments/f8y9nx/spring_forward_into_reddits_2019_transparency/ https://www.reddit.com/r/announcements/comments/f8y9nx/sprin...
T-hawk 7y ago
> Simply upvoting posts (that don't break any rules) in quarantined subreddits does not get you punished. The problem is that parenthetical, and determining it. Users were told that upvoting rule-breaking posts would risk a sitewide ban, without being told what content it was or what rules it broke. Reddit says it gets to punish users by declaring any content "bad", by arbitrary or overly broad or even unspecified rules. That's the uproar. This is not trying to improve behavior, this is trying to deplatform wrongthink.
- ehsankia 7y ago
  > Users were told that upvoting rule-breaking posts would risk a sitewide ban The consequences are very gradual, starting with warnings, then going up to temporary and eventually permanent ban. So it won't come out of nowhere, you will have plenty of change to adjust your behavior. > Reddit gets to declare any content "bad" by arbitrary or overly broad or even unspecified rules. That's the uproar. Not really, they have very precise rules and content policy, which they use to take down content. I do agree that being told which content you're being punished for, and what specific rules said content broke, would help users adjust their behavior, but you also run the chance, as with any sort of moderation, to teaching abusers ways to bypass the system. That's why things like shadowbanning exists. At the end of the day, as yesterday's ruling for Youtube showed [0], these websites are not public forums, and they are free to have any rules they want. If you're not happy or you don't trust that they apply their content policy fairly, you can move to a different website with different rules. [0] https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-51658341 https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-51658341
  - T-hawk 7y ago
    https://www.redditinc.com/policies/content-policy https://www.redditinc.com/policies/content-policy That's Reddit's content policy, and it's not precise at all. Pretty much anything can be deemed to fall under "threatens, harasses, or bullies" if it speaks against any group or opinion whatsoever. And the enforcement has been entirely selective and biased, targeting conservative subreddits and supporters, while "eat the rich" type posts are celebrated. Right, Reddit is a private platform and can choose to host or not any content it wants. I don't think anyone is disputing that. We can still wish Reddit would choose to act in favor of free speech and openness rather than choosing to deplatform opinions that fall on the unpopular side.
defertoreptar 7y ago
> This is only for being a moderator. Simply upvoting posts (that don't break any rules) in quarantined subreddits does not get you punished. That was a requirement given for being a new mod at /r/the_donald. There is also a separate, new rule change revealed in the recent "Transparency Report" that says that users who consistently upvote rule-breaking content will be banned. > The whole point of a quarantine is exactly to push people to report bad content, and acts as a warning. This new change makes sense as far as pushing people to report said content and not keep promoting it. That may be the case. On the other hand, that may only be the pretense. Every four years we see the same thing happen on Reddit. We saw massive upvoting of anything related to Obama, which at that time it was just thought to be organic (and maybe it even was). Then in 2016 we saw massive Bernie Sanders support to a swift and sudden change to Hillary Clinton support. That was followed by the "Correct the Record" movement and then later "Share Blue." These were all coordinated efforts to inorganically promote one political party and suppress another. But that wasn't enough to keep r/the_donald posts from regularly popping up on r/all. That's when they quarantined it. Now they're taking it even further. Before, political minority users may not post out of fear of being downvoted or targeted by those searching through their post history, but they felt safe upvoting content they agreed with. But now, there is this implication that they could face repercussions for simply upvoting the wrong thing. Sure, we're told it's only for things like illegal content or racial slurs, and only in quarantined subs. However, we'd be stupid not to see the political bias on Reddit. There's ambiguity over what counts as the wrong thing to upvote. They don't tell you what content you upvoted that you're being punished for. The net result? The "wrong" type of political content will be naturally suppressed by users now being reluctant to upvote it.
- ehsankia 7y ago
  I'm sorry but this is classic tinfoil conspiracy theorizing. I do regularly check T_D out of curiosity, and almost every single time I see rule breaking comments in top posts. Threats of violence, doxxing, etc. If you can find similar content on left leaning subreddits on a regular basis that doesn't get reported and deleted right away, then I'd be happy to entertain your theory, but I have not seen it. Also, the Donald wasn't quarantined until a few months ago, which is long long after The_Donald peaked and started popping up on r/all.

windyaskew 7y ago

This article [1] says they announced it today. I'm excited to see the fallout on this decision. [1] https://reclaimthenet.org/reddit-banned-for-upvote-policy/ https://reclaimthenet.org/reddit-banned-for-upvote-policy/

kickopotomus 7y ago
What would the fallout be? The collapse of quarantined communities? The policy only applies to individuals that consistently upvote policy-breaking[1] content within quarantined communities which is pretty clearly qualified. Those individuals will also receive a warning(s?) prior to being banned. Seems like a pretty fair policy all around seeing that upvoting is a conscious choice. [1]: https://www.redditinc.com/policies/content-policy https://www.redditinc.com/policies/content-policy
ehsankia 7y ago
The actual source is the Transparency report [0] from yesterday: > When we expanded our quarantine policy, we created an appeals process for sanctioned communities. One of the goals was to “force subscribers to reconsider their behavior and incentivize moderators to make changes.” While the policy attempted to hold moderators more accountable for enforcing healthier rules and norms, it didn’t address the role that each member plays in the health of their community. > Today, we’re making an update to address this gap: Users who consistently upvote policy-breaking content within quarantined communities will receive automated warnings, followed by further consequences like a temporary or permanent suspension. We hope this will encourage healthier behavior across these communities. Seems like their justification matches my guess in the parent post. [0] https://www.reddit.com/r/announcements/comments/f8y9nx/spring_forward_into_reddits_2019_transparency/ https://www.reddit.com/r/announcements/comments/f8y9nx/sprin...

T-hawk 7y ago

> Simply upvoting posts (that don't break any rules) in quarantined subreddits does not get you punished. The problem is that parenthetical, and determining it. Users were told that upvoting rule-breaking posts would risk a sitewide ban, without being told what content it was or what rules it broke. Reddit says it gets to punish users by declaring any content "bad", by arbitrary or overly broad or even unspecified rules. That's the uproar. This is not trying to improve behavior, this is trying to deplatform wrongthink.

ehsankia 7y ago
> Users were told that upvoting rule-breaking posts would risk a sitewide ban The consequences are very gradual, starting with warnings, then going up to temporary and eventually permanent ban. So it won't come out of nowhere, you will have plenty of change to adjust your behavior. > Reddit gets to declare any content "bad" by arbitrary or overly broad or even unspecified rules. That's the uproar. Not really, they have very precise rules and content policy, which they use to take down content. I do agree that being told which content you're being punished for, and what specific rules said content broke, would help users adjust their behavior, but you also run the chance, as with any sort of moderation, to teaching abusers ways to bypass the system. That's why things like shadowbanning exists. At the end of the day, as yesterday's ruling for Youtube showed [0], these websites are not public forums, and they are free to have any rules they want. If you're not happy or you don't trust that they apply their content policy fairly, you can move to a different website with different rules. [0] https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-51658341 https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-51658341
- T-hawk 7y ago
  https://www.redditinc.com/policies/content-policy https://www.redditinc.com/policies/content-policy That's Reddit's content policy, and it's not precise at all. Pretty much anything can be deemed to fall under "threatens, harasses, or bullies" if it speaks against any group or opinion whatsoever. And the enforcement has been entirely selective and biased, targeting conservative subreddits and supporters, while "eat the rich" type posts are celebrated. Right, Reddit is a private platform and can choose to host or not any content it wants. I don't think anyone is disputing that. We can still wish Reddit would choose to act in favor of free speech and openness rather than choosing to deplatform opinions that fall on the unpopular side.

defertoreptar 7y ago

> This is only for being a moderator. Simply upvoting posts (that don't break any rules) in quarantined subreddits does not get you punished. That was a requirement given for being a new mod at /r/the_donald. There is also a separate, new rule change revealed in the recent "Transparency Report" that says that users who consistently upvote rule-breaking content will be banned. > The whole point of a quarantine is exactly to push people to report bad content, and acts as a warning. This new change makes sense as far as pushing people to report said content and not keep promoting it. That may be the case. On the other hand, that may only be the pretense. Every four years we see the same thing happen on Reddit. We saw massive upvoting of anything related to Obama, which at that time it was just thought to be organic (and maybe it even was). Then in 2016 we saw massive Bernie Sanders support to a swift and sudden change to Hillary Clinton support. That was followed by the "Correct the Record" movement and then later "Share Blue." These were all coordinated efforts to inorganically promote one political party and suppress another. But that wasn't enough to keep r/the_donald posts from regularly popping up on r/all. That's when they quarantined it. Now they're taking it even further. Before, political minority users may not post out of fear of being downvoted or targeted by those searching through their post history, but they felt safe upvoting content they agreed with. But now, there is this implication that they could face repercussions for simply upvoting the wrong thing. Sure, we're told it's only for things like illegal content or racial slurs, and only in quarantined subs. However, we'd be stupid not to see the political bias on Reddit. There's ambiguity over what counts as the wrong thing to upvote. They don't tell you what content you upvoted that you're being punished for. The net result? The "wrong" type of political content will be naturally suppressed by users now being reluctant to upvote it.

ehsankia 7y ago
I'm sorry but this is classic tinfoil conspiracy theorizing. I do regularly check T_D out of curiosity, and almost every single time I see rule breaking comments in top posts. Threats of violence, doxxing, etc. If you can find similar content on left leaning subreddits on a regular basis that doesn't get reported and deleted right away, then I'd be happy to entertain your theory, but I have not seen it. Also, the Donald wasn't quarantined until a few months ago, which is long long after The_Donald peaked and started popping up on r/all.