3 ms·

I think the whole creepshots thing shows how hypocritical reddit is about free speech. I thought the Gawker article did a good job describing the hive mind att

I think the whole creepshots thing shows how hypocritical reddit is about free speech. I thought the Gawker article did a good job describing the hive mind attitude there of "my speech is OK, but you must burn for yours". And, naturally, they responded exactly as I would expect: banning that speech. I don't envy reddit's admins regarding this topic. Their user base is extremely worked up over the notion of free speech, so any appearance of interfering will be seen in a horrible light. But things like creepshots and jailbait do horrible things for their reputation, which could leave it with a situation where it becomes another 4chan, which I don't think they want. In the end, I agree with potatolicious: this commitment to free speech will last only until the next shit storm occurs.

danielweber 14y ago
Reddit was following an internally consistent rule pattern when banning links to Gawker. (You can argue that following the rule pattern is stupid, like something that comes out of a large bureaucracy instead of a <10 person startup. I'd agree.) this commitment to free speech will last only until the next shit storm occurs Since reddit has shown the only times they ban anything is in response to shit storms, they have unwittingly set themselves up for more shit storms. AFAIK the people who hated creepshots got ignored when raising the question to the admins, so the only other option was to create a new shit storm. Reddit probably thinks they are sticking to their guns, but by not having any kind of release valve beyond a shit storm, they're bringing them on.
- SoftwareMaven 14y ago
  I suppose my original comment was not clear. I meant the reddit community, not Reddit, the company. I think the Reddit admins are being reasonably consistent (or at least trying to be). Banning the article that doxxes the guy is following their rule. Banning all of Gawker is something very different. It's a way for reddit's moderators to punish Gawker for "contempt of reddit". by not having any kind of release valve beyond a shit storm, they're bringing them on Very concise, insightful way of putting it!

danielweber 14y ago

Reddit was following an internally consistent rule pattern when banning links to Gawker. (You can argue that following the rule pattern is stupid, like something that comes out of a large bureaucracy instead of a <10 person startup. I'd agree.) this commitment to free speech will last only until the next shit storm occurs Since reddit has shown the only times they ban anything is in response to shit storms, they have unwittingly set themselves up for more shit storms. AFAIK the people who hated creepshots got ignored when raising the question to the admins, so the only other option was to create a new shit storm. Reddit probably thinks they are sticking to their guns, but by not having any kind of release valve beyond a shit storm, they're bringing them on.

SoftwareMaven 14y ago
I suppose my original comment was not clear. I meant the reddit community, not Reddit, the company. I think the Reddit admins are being reasonably consistent (or at least trying to be). Banning the article that doxxes the guy is following their rule. Banning all of Gawker is something very different. It's a way for reddit's moderators to punish Gawker for "contempt of reddit". by not having any kind of release valve beyond a shit storm, they're bringing them on Very concise, insightful way of putting it!