3 ms·

I guess I still just disagree with Pao's position. The internet itself is a lesson in this. The internet has innumerable "ugly" sites (which are akin to subs fo

I guess I still just disagree with Pao's position. The internet itself is a lesson in this. The internet has innumerable "ugly" sites (which are akin to subs for reddit). Do advertisers not buy web ads? No, they just buy ads on the sites they want to buy them on. Maybe Reddit was struggling to monetize at the rate they wanted. I'm sure investor pressure is high. But Reddit had a shot at being something like the internet on top of the internet, and choosing this path kills that. Doesn't mean it's the wrong decision, but the response I'd have liked would have been something like "we're working hard to ensure these less savory parts of reddit are only encountered by those looking for them and are very much aware of the content." NOTE: The illegal stuff obviously falls outside this, as the internet (and a corporation) clearly have to operate within the relevant laws.

jsmeaton 11y ago
> "we're working hard to ensure these less savory parts of reddit are only encountered by those looking for them and are very much aware of the content." That's exactly what they're doing, is it not? They're providing opt in controls for the less savoury content: > Similar to NSFW, another type of content that is difficult to define, but you know it when you see it, is the content that violates a common sense of decency. This classification will require a login, must be opted into, will not appear in search results or public listings, and will generate no revenue for Reddit. And the few subreddits that incite abuse are getting shuttered. I feel that's more than reasonable.