5 ms·

This is a false equivalence. HN ostensibly exist for discussion about tech and that’s reflected by the vast majority of the content, a significant portion of c

This is a false equivalence. HN ostensibly exist for discussion about tech and that’s reflected by the vast majority of the content, a significant portion of content of KF is unsavory or worse.

jimmydorry 4y ago
There are plenty of examples of reddit doing the same to subreddits they didn't agree with. Take /r/the_donald for example. They cheered for "their guy" non-stop for years, but were not doing anything illegal or morally unsavory. Low and behold, out of the blue a few accounts posted threats against police officers (the sub overwhelmingly espousing "Blue Lives Matter" at the time amongst the backdrop of other subs espousing "Black Lives Matter") and that was enough to close the sub down. If you set the bar low enough, it doesn't matter what the platform's content is oriented towards, and while HackerNews may not be in the firing line right now, who's to say that it will forever remain off the radar? If we are fine setting the bar towards a platform being responsible for all user generated content in real-time, just know that this puts niche communities like HN at-risk.
- alphabettsy 4y ago
  Your interpretation of events regarding /r/the_donald and it’s content are quite a mischaracterization from what I recall. Bigotry, racial slurs and calls for violence were thinly veiled with euphemisms to avoid breaking sub and Reddit rules. Threats against police I don’t recall being part of it at all. I don’t buy the slippery slope argument.
  - jimmydorry 4y ago
    I simplified the timeline of events as the point of the comment was to show that platforms can be targetted for being distasteful, even if their content is not centered around breaking laws, doxing, etc. Racism and calls for violence were never allowed on t_d and were removed on report / were downvoted heavily. T_d was allowed to persist for as long as it did precisely because it didn't violate any site rules, even though the reddit leadership really hated it.

This is a false equivalence. HN ostensibly exist for discussion about tech and that’s reflected by the vast majority of the content, a significant portion of content of KF is unsavory or worse.

jimmydorry 4y ago

There are plenty of examples of reddit doing the same to subreddits they didn't agree with. Take /r/the_donald for example. They cheered for "their guy" non-stop for years, but were not doing anything illegal or morally unsavory. Low and behold, out of the blue a few accounts posted threats against police officers (the sub overwhelmingly espousing "Blue Lives Matter" at the time amongst the backdrop of other subs espousing "Black Lives Matter") and that was enough to close the sub down. If you set the bar low enough, it doesn't matter what the platform's content is oriented towards, and while HackerNews may not be in the firing line right now, who's to say that it will forever remain off the radar? If we are fine setting the bar towards a platform being responsible for all user generated content in real-time, just know that this puts niche communities like HN at-risk.

alphabettsy 4y ago
Your interpretation of events regarding /r/the_donald and it’s content are quite a mischaracterization from what I recall. Bigotry, racial slurs and calls for violence were thinly veiled with euphemisms to avoid breaking sub and Reddit rules. Threats against police I don’t recall being part of it at all. I don’t buy the slippery slope argument.
- jimmydorry 4y ago
  I simplified the timeline of events as the point of the comment was to show that platforms can be targetted for being distasteful, even if their content is not centered around breaking laws, doxing, etc. Racism and calls for violence were never allowed on t_d and were removed on report / were downvoted heavily. T_d was allowed to persist for as long as it did precisely because it didn't violate any site rules, even though the reddit leadership really hated it.