5 ms·

I suspect this is a case of an isolated demand for rigor. It’s quite difficult to have a political reddit with 700,000 subscribers and not have comments or post

I suspect this is a case of an isolated demand for rigor. It’s quite difficult to have a political reddit with 700,000 subscribers and not have comments or post being made that break the rules. Especially when there are strong incentives for people to use alts to make false flag posts. I strongly doubt r/the_donald is being fairly treated by reddit when most of the admin team has a fundamental objection to the sub’s message. The admin team in the past have shown they cannot act professionally. For example the CEO edited user’s messages in the r/the_donald to try and create discord between users.

wtallis 7y ago
> For example the CEO edited user’s messages in the r/the_donald to try and create discord between users. Do you really feel that's a fair summary of what happened, in spite of the discussion of that incident elsewhere in this thread?
- blackflame7000 7y ago
  It's an extremely fair piece of information to use when trying to decide just how impartial the Reddit Admins are.
  - wtallis 7y ago
    It's fair to consider as evidence of potential bias or lack of professional restraint, but only if you aren't lying about what actually went down.
    - Faark 7y ago
      Yeah, it is clear evidence that reddit and this subreddit are in open conflict for quite a while. I find it quite impressive admins didn't just end this spat, but instead go more creative routes like this one or creating quarantine mode for subs, beside the infamous & less impressive events. I totally had expected this sub to get banned already. Well see about the future...
ArchReaper 7y ago
> For example the CEO edited user’s messages in the r/the_donald to try and create discord between users. This is inaccurate - it was very clearly not intended to 'create discord between users' and claiming that it was is at best politically biased and at worse a lie.
- ALittleLight 7y ago
  I just googled it and it seems like he changed messages that were insulting him to insult moderators of the subreddit. The parent's comment doesn't seem wrong to me, if that's true. He altered communications of reddit users to make it look like they were insulting reddit moderators, in such a way as to falsely attribute those insults to the original authors.
  - wtallis 7y ago
    You're still spinning it unfairly, by leaving out relevant information. It was a pranking attempt that fell flat, and was neither intended to nor successful in having the effect of surreptitiously turning T_D users against each other. The admin in question quickly admitted to the deed and explained his motives. Attributing other, conflicting motives without further justification is misleading at best.
    - asdfsdafsdf 7y ago
      No you're spinning it by saying "It was a pranking attempt that fell flat". Either way do you really think it's okay for a CEO to "prank" users by silently editing their posts then only admitting to it after being caught. Seems like the "prank" excuse is a spin. If it was a prank he would have done it and admitted it without getting caught in-between. Also, it has to be funny to be a prank, otherwise it's bullying, where was the punchline?
    - derision 7y ago
      It wasn't just any admin, it was the CEO.
    - ALittleLight 7y ago

wtallis 7y ago

> For example the CEO edited user’s messages in the r/the_donald to try and create discord between users. Do you really feel that's a fair summary of what happened, in spite of the discussion of that incident elsewhere in this thread?

blackflame7000 7y ago
It's an extremely fair piece of information to use when trying to decide just how impartial the Reddit Admins are.
- wtallis 7y ago
  It's fair to consider as evidence of potential bias or lack of professional restraint, but only if you aren't lying about what actually went down.
  - Faark 7y ago
    Yeah, it is clear evidence that reddit and this subreddit are in open conflict for quite a while. I find it quite impressive admins didn't just end this spat, but instead go more creative routes like this one or creating quarantine mode for subs, beside the infamous & less impressive events. I totally had expected this sub to get banned already. Well see about the future...

ArchReaper 7y ago

> For example the CEO edited user’s messages in the r/the_donald to try and create discord between users. This is inaccurate - it was very clearly not intended to 'create discord between users' and claiming that it was is at best politically biased and at worse a lie.

ALittleLight 7y ago
I just googled it and it seems like he changed messages that were insulting him to insult moderators of the subreddit. The parent's comment doesn't seem wrong to me, if that's true. He altered communications of reddit users to make it look like they were insulting reddit moderators, in such a way as to falsely attribute those insults to the original authors.
- wtallis 7y ago
  You're still spinning it unfairly, by leaving out relevant information. It was a pranking attempt that fell flat, and was neither intended to nor successful in having the effect of surreptitiously turning T_D users against each other. The admin in question quickly admitted to the deed and explained his motives. Attributing other, conflicting motives without further justification is misleading at best.
  - asdfsdafsdf 7y ago
    No you're spinning it by saying "It was a pranking attempt that fell flat". Either way do you really think it's okay for a CEO to "prank" users by silently editing their posts then only admitting to it after being caught. Seems like the "prank" excuse is a spin. If it was a prank he would have done it and admitted it without getting caught in-between. Also, it has to be funny to be a prank, otherwise it's bullying, where was the punchline?
  - derision 7y ago
    It wasn't just any admin, it was the CEO.
  - ALittleLight 7y ago