4 ms·
Top comment from an admin: """ We decided to do this due to the heavy cyber component to this war and the chance of manipulated content. Even seemingly innocuo
by conjecTech 5y ago
Top comment from an admin:
"""
We decided to do this due to the heavy cyber component to this war and the chance of manipulated content. Even seemingly innocuous links could be hosted by someone that is less benign. We certainly recognize that this is a pretty far reaching decision but there are generally other ways for most people to share the type of content that is being described.
As to why this wasn't communicated, there is a lot of things going on right now and sometimes moving fast means missing steps along the way (like sharing with mods). We did not intend to hide this decision.
"""
So it has little to nothing to do with attempting to censor.
- asjldkfin 5y agoThis is the exact same response you'd get if it had everything to do with censorship.
- rrook 5y agoThis line of reasoning, presented without evidence, can be used to undermine virtually any statement; it doesn't contribute to discourse in any way.
- asjldkfin 5y agoSorry, I'm not sure what you're talking about. But I think it's pretty basic common sense that nobody censoring information will explicitly admit to it.
- rrook 5y agoThis is the exact same response you'd get if it had everything to do with ~censorship~ attempting push back on anything that reduces a propaganda vector. Do you see?
- asjldkfin 5y agoThe difference is that in Western society (assume you're Western), we've agreed that people should have the right to think for themselves and decided what is right and wrong- so it should be up to them to decided what is propaganda and what isn't.
- rrook 5y agoI don't disagree with this. I'm saying that your original reply relies on nothing but insinuation.
- justinpowers 5y agoHuh? It’s also the exact same response you’d get if it had nothing to do with censorship. Your comment offers nothing.
- justinpowers 5y agoSo this ^ deserves a downvote? Please tell me why.
- 8note 5y agoIt's basically the same comment as the gp
- justinpowers 5y agoI must be confused because I don’t see how. Isn’t it the exact opposite? GP is essentially saying “that’s what you’d say if you were lying” and I’m responding with a silly, opposing example of “that’s what you’d say if you were telling the truth”. They are both meaningless statements. The second serves to point out the meaninglessness of the first. Or I’m just going crazy.
- 8note 5y agoid expect that if it were about censorship, they wouldnt say anything, and any instance of removal would be noted as being from the spam filter. The spam filter intentionally or not does a lot of censorship
- hombre_fatal 5y agoThey are saying someone might post information on an .ru link that they don't want people to see. Isn't that basic censorship? That said, this is just par for the course of Reddit. Just like how every subreddit has arbitrary rules that discourage viewpoints the moderators don't want people to see whether that's Bitcoin Cash on r/bitcoin or getting scolded by a mod on r/vancouver when I said something bad about the DTES. Banning .ru is about as effective towards the imagined cause as subreddits putting up yellow and blue banners.
- xdennis 5y agoYes. We need to limit access to Russian influence. It's a war.
- everybodyknows 5y agoSo now, those who attempt to analyze Putin's state of mind by close reading of his public pronouncements -- in full, from kremlin.ru -- need a different forum. We are collectively deciding by default that understanding the enemy is unnecessary, at least not necessary for us ordinary citizens. Necessary only for some elite, membership criteria for which proceed to tighten. This is a betrayal of one of the core values that make a liberal, rules-based order worth fighting for.
- tasha0663 5y ago"Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication, or other information." Yes, it is censorship. The what, why, how, shoulds, and coulds of it are irrelevant to the fact that it is censorship.
- odessacubbage 5y ago'even if it saves one life' has been exchanged for 'even if it prevents one lie' this kind of inept safetyism is fundamentally incompatible with a free society.