4 ms·

I think that once a sub attracts a large amount of readers, it's unethical to block certain conversations. For large subs like /r/politics, a select few people

I think that once a sub attracts a large amount of readers, it's unethical to block certain conversations. For large subs like /r/politics, a select few people get to control what's fed into the eyeballs of millions of people. And we don't even know what content wasn't allowed to be posted, how can we trust they're unbiased?

marcinzm 5y ago
>I think that once a sub attracts a large amount of readers, it's unethical to block certain conversations. Why? You're free to make your own subreddit with a different bias or no bias. No one really assumes it's unbiased and they go there because of the bias that they agree with. People like communities of like minded people. By that logic any large scale media (tv, newspapers, magazines, etc.) should not be allowed to have bias even if the only reason people went there was for the bias.
- emodendroket 5y ago
  This is quite true too. If you don't feel like politics is conservative enough for your tastes, worldnews is right there for you. And there are countless smaller communities catering to nearly any perspective imaginable.
emodendroket 5y ago
It's shown time and time again that the alternative, with a radical free-speech approach to content moderation, is that the community attracts users who post trash content (e.g., white nationalism, screwball conspiracy, glorification of violence, misogyny), who then gradually drive away everyone else. That's why they never attract much of a following and end up withering and dying.
adzm 5y ago
As a former mod of /r/politics the reality is quite mundane. The bias you see on the front page of that subreddit is pretty much entirely due to the users upvoting. The mod team is really careful to ensure nothing gets removed simply due to political differences and is internally transparent, and includes mods from a wide spectrum of political beliefs and backgrounds. Interestingly the mod team is simultaneously accused of being biased towards left and right wing politics at once!

marcinzm 5y ago

>I think that once a sub attracts a large amount of readers, it's unethical to block certain conversations. Why? You're free to make your own subreddit with a different bias or no bias. No one really assumes it's unbiased and they go there because of the bias that they agree with. People like communities of like minded people. By that logic any large scale media (tv, newspapers, magazines, etc.) should not be allowed to have bias even if the only reason people went there was for the bias.

emodendroket 5y ago
This is quite true too. If you don't feel like politics is conservative enough for your tastes, worldnews is right there for you. And there are countless smaller communities catering to nearly any perspective imaginable.

emodendroket 5y ago

It's shown time and time again that the alternative, with a radical free-speech approach to content moderation, is that the community attracts users who post trash content (e.g., white nationalism, screwball conspiracy, glorification of violence, misogyny), who then gradually drive away everyone else. That's why they never attract much of a following and end up withering and dying.

adzm 5y ago

As a former mod of /r/politics the reality is quite mundane. The bias you see on the front page of that subreddit is pretty much entirely due to the users upvoting. The mod team is really careful to ensure nothing gets removed simply due to political differences and is internally transparent, and includes mods from a wide spectrum of political beliefs and backgrounds. Interestingly the mod team is simultaneously accused of being biased towards left and right wing politics at once!