24 ms·
Do you think Kapor really supports additional censorship on reddit? My issue isn't with what he said in his quote. It's that the Times changed their well-balan
by rory096 11y ago
Do you think Kapor really supports additional censorship on reddit?
My issue isn't with what he said in his quote. It's that the Times changed their well-balanced piece into one that implies the crappy parts of reddit need to be brought under 'control' and quoted a sentence from Kapor that lends support. I may be wrong (and to be honest I don't personally know much about Mitch), but I'd be surprised if a founder of the Electronic Frontier Foundation feels that reddit should be more restrictive on speech it hasn't moderated to this point. While his quote doesn't directly say he supports more censorship by any means, including it in the context of that article misconstrues his (probable) beliefs.
- tptacek 11y agoIf you're going to make an argument that this piece is "pro-censorship", you're going to have to support it with evidence from the text. I just took the time to reread it, and I do not see support for censorship in it.
- rory096 11y agoI'd specifically point to the Hero vs Angry Mob motif and the quote "bullying, harrassment[sic] and ugly behavior are out of control on the web," which implies that they must be brought under control. Obviously within the context of the overall spin towards sexism as the sole cause we discussed over there -> (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9871281 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9871281)
- tptacek 11y agoThe article doesn't saying bullying is out of control. The article says that the Pao incident will renew charges that bullying is out of control. And: Pao's resignation demonstrable did renew those charges!
- rory096 11y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_word https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_word If they expressed any opposing view, that might be valid. But they may as well have stated it as fact. (aside: that's not a WP: page anymore? lame)
- tptacek 11y agoYou're looking for: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Words_to_watch#Unsupported_attributions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Word... And the problem Wikipedia has with them is that they can disguise special pleading. But that's clearly not what's happening here: there very obviously is a renewed concern over bullying in the wake of the Pao fiasco.
- rory096 11y agoEh, that link just doesn't have the same impact. The weaseling is in the reverse – by saying their article is only about 'some people' they imply that other people exist, but never give them any ink. Hence I say the sentence is equivalent to stating objectively that cyberbullying is a problem that must be stopped and this incident is proof.
- smsm42 11y agoAs James Taranto likes to note, "some people" in journalism is a first person pronoun. Or at least some people are saying so.