4 ms·

Not sure if you're disagreeing with tomp's comment or just changing the subject. TwoX is a default and at least before I quit the site a contrary view in that

Not sure if you're disagreeing with tomp's comment or just changing the subject. TwoX is a default and at least before I quit the site a contrary view in that sub was likely to earn a shadowban. I understand the mods have to deal with trolls but when contrary viewpoints are being censored as "trolling" it's gone too far. The toxicity of the reddit's "social justice" movement and SRS in particular is poisoning the site and making discourse about controversial topics nearly impossible.

DanBC 12y ago
I thought shadowbans were implemented by admins and admin tools and not by mods. Has that changed?
- 8note 12y ago
  no, reddit's ban types just aren't well publicised
- just_athrowaway 12y ago
  Who knows who gets to do what, but at least one admin became an SRS mod immediately upon leaving their position. http://www.dailydot.com/business/reddit-admin-intortus-leaves-srs/ http://www.dailydot.com/business/reddit-admin-intortus-leave... I decided to stop by for old time's sake and found this on the front-page: http://np.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/2v39v2/what_popular_subreddit_has_a_really_toxic/coe23u7 http://np.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/2v39v2/what_popula...
raldi 12y ago
You can discuss controversial topics all you want. You just can't do it on any subreddit you please.
- just_athrowaway 12y ago
  That's great but I'm not talking about subreddits banning topics, I'm talking about the enforcement of acceptable views on topics that are already being discussed. I agree with having safeguards against things like hate-speech, I disagree with how conveniently and broadly that's defined by certain people in order to push their social and political agendas.
  - rmc 12y ago
    Certain subreddits are set up for specific political or social causes. Should a subreddit set up (say) for "Catholicism" should accept discussion about whether the Pope is the Anti-Christ?
chiaro 12y ago
Really, the social justice movement is poisoning the site? Please, tell me how you've been made feel unwelcome by that. I'm sure it'll be very revealing.
- just_athrowaway 12y ago
  This is a perfect example of reddit-style commenting. It's paternalistic, dismissive, sarcastic and it adds nothing to the discussion. This type of commenting is done to dehumanize and marginalize those you disagree with so you don't have to think about what they're saying. It's bad for discourse and it's how echo-chambers are built.
  - chiaro 12y ago
    If you've looked at reddit and come to the conclusion that people who are concerned about social justice is the most pervasive problem with the site's community, don't be surprised if people dismiss you. Perhaps /pol/ would be more your speed.
rmc 12y ago
So if (say) a gay subreddit bans someone who wants to talk about how gays are evil and they should repent, that's "gone too far"?
- just_athrowaway 12y ago
  This is difficult. Most everybody can agree that gay-bashing is unproductive and not part of civil discourse. The problem is I see people online and in real life attempting to engage in honest discourse and getting silenced as if they were gay-bashing. That's going too far. I was also talking about default subs where people are being activists and pushing stories to the front-page. Blowback is a part of activism, if somebody gets pissed about a social justice story that's been pushed to the default front-page that's different from the person who searches out a LGBT sub to go pick a fight.
  - rmc 12y ago
    So if you're OK with a gay subreddit banning people trying to discuss "should gay acts be legal?"/"Should gay marriage be legal?", surely you're OK with SRS subs (or other feminists/anti-racist subs) banning things they think are against the core tenants of the sub? SRS and the SJW subs aren't default subs. So don't use SRS as an example of "all of reddit".
    - just__throwaway 12y ago
      I'm talking about discourse being shaped in default subs and not just TwoX. I don't begrudge people their safe spaces, but I do think it's deplorable to take an "if I can't feel safe nobody can" stance. Especially when "feeling safe" implies being sheltered from anybody who disagrees with you. SRS wasn't supposed to be the point of this but I feel confident that any reasonable person who reads their FAQ will realize they aren't just keeping to themselves. Their reason for existence is to change the entire site. They justify and celebrate their bullying tactics. Out of respect, and since my last throwaway has already lost posting privileges I must bow out of this discussion. But I'll leave you with some thoughts from Christopher Hitchens on free speech. Earlier in the video you can hear the arguments for abandoning free speech, I think the reasons given for this are often as hateful and fearful as everything they fight against but I'm linking the version of the video with their arguments, in their words, left in. http://youtu.be/QIyBZNGH0TY?t=20m40s http://youtu.be/QIyBZNGH0TY?t=20m40s
SixSigma 12y ago
Having fat sympathy will get you banned from fatpeoplehate, or being fat, or saying you find fat people sexually attractive, or even socially. And the moderators are praised for it! http://imgur.com/a/do8dk http://imgur.com/a/do8dk

DanBC 12y ago

I thought shadowbans were implemented by admins and admin tools and not by mods. Has that changed?

8note 12y ago
no, reddit's ban types just aren't well publicised
just_athrowaway 12y ago
Who knows who gets to do what, but at least one admin became an SRS mod immediately upon leaving their position. http://www.dailydot.com/business/reddit-admin-intortus-leaves-srs/ http://www.dailydot.com/business/reddit-admin-intortus-leave... I decided to stop by for old time's sake and found this on the front-page: http://np.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/2v39v2/what_popular_subreddit_has_a_really_toxic/coe23u7 http://np.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/2v39v2/what_popula...

raldi 12y ago

You can discuss controversial topics all you want. You just can't do it on any subreddit you please.

just_athrowaway 12y ago
That's great but I'm not talking about subreddits banning topics, I'm talking about the enforcement of acceptable views on topics that are already being discussed. I agree with having safeguards against things like hate-speech, I disagree with how conveniently and broadly that's defined by certain people in order to push their social and political agendas.
- rmc 12y ago
  Certain subreddits are set up for specific political or social causes. Should a subreddit set up (say) for "Catholicism" should accept discussion about whether the Pope is the Anti-Christ?

chiaro 12y ago

Really, the social justice movement is poisoning the site? Please, tell me how you've been made feel unwelcome by that. I'm sure it'll be very revealing.

just_athrowaway 12y ago
This is a perfect example of reddit-style commenting. It's paternalistic, dismissive, sarcastic and it adds nothing to the discussion. This type of commenting is done to dehumanize and marginalize those you disagree with so you don't have to think about what they're saying. It's bad for discourse and it's how echo-chambers are built.
- chiaro 12y ago
  If you've looked at reddit and come to the conclusion that people who are concerned about social justice is the most pervasive problem with the site's community, don't be surprised if people dismiss you. Perhaps /pol/ would be more your speed.

rmc 12y ago

So if (say) a gay subreddit bans someone who wants to talk about how gays are evil and they should repent, that's "gone too far"?

just_athrowaway 12y ago
This is difficult. Most everybody can agree that gay-bashing is unproductive and not part of civil discourse. The problem is I see people online and in real life attempting to engage in honest discourse and getting silenced as if they were gay-bashing. That's going too far. I was also talking about default subs where people are being activists and pushing stories to the front-page. Blowback is a part of activism, if somebody gets pissed about a social justice story that's been pushed to the default front-page that's different from the person who searches out a LGBT sub to go pick a fight.
- rmc 12y ago
  So if you're OK with a gay subreddit banning people trying to discuss "should gay acts be legal?"/"Should gay marriage be legal?", surely you're OK with SRS subs (or other feminists/anti-racist subs) banning things they think are against the core tenants of the sub? SRS and the SJW subs aren't default subs. So don't use SRS as an example of "all of reddit".
  - just__throwaway 12y ago
    I'm talking about discourse being shaped in default subs and not just TwoX. I don't begrudge people their safe spaces, but I do think it's deplorable to take an "if I can't feel safe nobody can" stance. Especially when "feeling safe" implies being sheltered from anybody who disagrees with you. SRS wasn't supposed to be the point of this but I feel confident that any reasonable person who reads their FAQ will realize they aren't just keeping to themselves. Their reason for existence is to change the entire site. They justify and celebrate their bullying tactics. Out of respect, and since my last throwaway has already lost posting privileges I must bow out of this discussion. But I'll leave you with some thoughts from Christopher Hitchens on free speech. Earlier in the video you can hear the arguments for abandoning free speech, I think the reasons given for this are often as hateful and fearful as everything they fight against but I'm linking the version of the video with their arguments, in their words, left in. http://youtu.be/QIyBZNGH0TY?t=20m40s http://youtu.be/QIyBZNGH0TY?t=20m40s

SixSigma 12y ago

Having fat sympathy will get you banned from fatpeoplehate, or being fat, or saying you find fat people sexually attractive, or even socially. And the moderators are praised for it! http://imgur.com/a/do8dk http://imgur.com/a/do8dk