Hacker News Reader

Comment by devit | Hacker News Reader

Not sure: he continued Ellen Pao's job in destroying the massive goodwill they had, and being a founder he was immune to calls to step down and effectively made the changes permanent.

Reddit used to be loved and trusted as a place that cared about its community and free speech, but now most users probably stay on Reddit only because it's popular, and would jump ship as soon as a more popular alternative, even in just a niche, shows up.

But of course, thanks to funding, possible good management and inertia, Reddit might just be able to out-innovate and out-compete anyone else and keep its current position.

View on HN

> a place that cared about its community and free speech

And, of course, ethics in game journalism.

Free speech is a deep subject with many different interpretations even in the freest of societies (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech)

Political philosophy aside, personally I am saddened to see the same noble freedom that was once demanded to protect the expression of novel, perhaps subversive ideas and the speaking of truth to power invoked to defend the asinine, violent utterances of mobs of bullies as they attack their victims. People, obviously, shouldn't be arrested for public displays of ignorance or mean-spiritedness, but calling that "freedom of speech" makes me sad.

>and would jump ship as soon as a more popular alternative, even in just a niche, shows up.

I didn't jump to Voat. Reddit for me currently has the 'least friction'. I know how it works, I know the memes to post for free karma (although I prefer lurking). It's becoming really commercial though ... lots of content advertising. Reddit is really novel for the first 1-2 years and it feels great to 'participate' in the silly memes but after 1-2 years it becomes stale (my experience).

I think that Reddit creating itself into BuzzFeed but with Reddit content is a genius move.

Most people will react negatively on Reddit but those are the vocal minority. Most people that I know are on reddit just look at cute images of cats and lurk, rarely post.

> cared about its community and free speech

I'm sure we're all weeping over the demise of /r/coontown and other Stormfront-affiliated subreddits. What a sad loss, and what a valuable group of users to alienate!

As far as I understand the reddit situation, a major problem is that advertisers have a strong fear of screenshots of their product next to a random badthinking redditor's screed becoming subject of some five minute hate on twitter or facebook.

If I were a US citizen, I'd be less enthusiastic than you seem to be about this situation, irrespective of coincidental alignment of (current) outcomes with personal moral sensibilities.

I'd want to look very hard at the fact that the control loop for "what you can't say" on the ad-driven internet runs through corporate ad departments and random twitter mobs.

Much as I agree that advertising as an industry needs to die (and I recommend Patreon style funding to people wanting to be immune to advertisers), in practise putting the advertisers in an armlock has often been the only way to persuade overly idealistic free-speechers to put the brakes on stalking and doxxing, child porn and the suchlike.

If you want to say something, say it. Don't say the opposite in a sarcastic tone.

So you're in favour of all forms of free speech except sarcasm?

Edit: ok, evidently jokes aren't a popular mode of speech either.

This isn't about surpressing free speech. It's about basic communication and debate.

Sarcasm used to be a effective and totally valid way to make a point, -I mean it was even part of basic reading/writing education when I grew up 20 years ago.

Of course you can easily overdo it but I think banning sarcasm has a significant downside and we should rather teach people to use it correctly.

Once again, this isn't about banning anything. This is about productive conversation. A value which makes HN unique out of all the internet communities.

What the commenter was doing was insinuating a conclusion based upon a straw man, so as not to be scrutinised for the underlying conclusion.

Didn't downvote (ok, even gave you an upvote while commenting) but I think you misinterpreted the situation I/we reacted to.

Parent didn't censor the offensive post. Free speech means having the right to criticize others.

This isn't Reddit. Make a succinct point, not a straw man.

That word doesn't mean what you think it means.

Reddit as it stands now is a hive of scum and villainy. If they want to be considered sane and serious and not an upscale 4chan, they need to kickban all the hate frothing racists and misogynists and clamp down hard on "free speech". Unfortunately, since their site has stunk for so long, that's basically all who's left, except the few voices crying in the wilderness.

> Reddit as it stands now is a hive of scum and villainy

200 million users, and you think they're all that are left on there?

A rhetorical exaggeration, but the scum and villainy contingent are loud, and enablers are many. If it isn't you being targeted for hate, it's all too easy to say "oh I just talk about games" and never even notice how very white and male the discussion is. Not bothering to notice oppression is oppression (and an exercise of privilege).

What is wrong with being white and male?

There are complications about the origin of both concepts, but in context, absolutely nothing.

What's wrong is not noticing that your conversation is nothing but white and male. It implies that there are people who have been driven out, one way or another, and you aren't surprised by their absence.

>There are complications about the origin of both concepts

Are you suggesting that my race and gender are ...'problematic?'

Nah, at this point I'm suggesting that you're looking to argue.

Read this: https://medium.com/message/how-white-people-got-made-6eeb076...

>they need to kickban all the hate frothing racists and misogynists and clamp down hard on "free speech"

This sounds dangerously like fascism IMHO.

Absent the kind of hyper-exaggeration that makes people invoke Godwin's law, no, it doesn't. Your freedom of thought and expression is not imperiled if you get bounced out of a private club for being hateful.

This has nothing to do with Nazis, please get a grip.

Fascism is a clearly defined concept, and there are many examples other than Nazism. In point of fact: it is not necessary to invoke Nazism in order to define fascism.

The kind of autocratic and intolerant behaviour that you suggest is clearly reminiscent of fascism.

Anyway, I have seen the arguments you raise before and I don't really see that we'll arrive at any kind of agreement here.

"This sounds dangerously like fascism IMHO."

No, no, no... you've got it all wrong. See, smart and good people would be deciding what is acceptable and what isn't.

Totally different.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com