Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Saturday November 26 2016, @08:51PM   Printer-friendly
from the when-people-don't-think-things-through-all-the-way dept.

According to /u/Spez, Reddit CEO, the reports of messages edited without any user consent or knowledge are correct as he admits to have done it so himself:

Hey Everyone,

Yep. I messed with the "fuck u/spez" comments, replacing "spez" with r/the_donald mods for about an hour. It's been a long week here trying to unwind the r/pizzagate stuff. As much as we try to maintain a good relationship with you all, it does get old getting called a pedophile constantly. As the CEO, I shouldn't play such games, and it's all fixed now. Our community team is pretty pissed at me, so I most assuredly won't do this again.

Fuck u/spez.

The edits were made in a thread linked from the Washington Post which described the recent ban of the /r/pizzagate subreddit which tried to uncover child-molesters and recently moved to voat.co.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 26 2016, @09:32PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 26 2016, @09:32PM (#433403)

    Not surprising to see your troll opinions...

    Yes Reddit has major flaws, but a vast majority of stuff on there is just fine. If you're looking for hobby groups and non-political news then its a great place, if you want truth in journalism well then you'll have to use your critical thinking and alternate sources...

    Censorship sucks, but don't fool yourself that corporate web portals won't censor people.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   -1  
       Flamebait=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Flamebait' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   -1  
  • (Score: 0, Troll) by Ethanol-fueled on Saturday November 26 2016, @09:40PM

    by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Saturday November 26 2016, @09:40PM (#433406) Homepage

    Yeah, no, let's normalize censorship.

    You can put your lips on my mushroom-headed cock and siphon the come out of my balls, you spineless bootlicker.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 26 2016, @09:55PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 26 2016, @09:55PM (#433414)

      Lol get your head out of your butthole. When you polarize your opinions beyond reason then you lose credibility. Reddit is fine for a lot of things, just not a good source for truth in journalism. Lots of shills, lots of marketers, don't believe what users post without using the old noodle. Censorship shouldn't be normalized but we can't control how a corporation chooses to use their own platform. Maybe what you're searching for with your raving mad ramblings is.... New legislation that allows for punishment of reddit/fb/twitter when they censor people.

      • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Saturday November 26 2016, @10:22PM

        by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Saturday November 26 2016, @10:22PM (#433419) Journal

        Sorry, but from what I've seen of reddit, it pretty much sucks. I didn't grow up with a text message device in my hands, and the entire format looks stupid to me. That - and the censorship.

        I don't believe that any major online site really has any moral authority to edit much more than the "seven words you'll never hear on television". Maybe an outright threat to assassinate someone - hide it from the public, and notify the secret service. Anything else should be good to go. Fuck Reddit and all the politically correct authoritarians.

        • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 26 2016, @10:27PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 26 2016, @10:27PM (#433420)

          I don't believe that any major online site really has any moral authority to edit much more than the "seven words you'll never hear on television".

          And why would they have the moral authority to edit (censor) those words if they don't have the moral authority to censor other things? Because people are offended by them? Because society has arbitrarily deemed them to be bad? Because of other subjective feelings? Well, now you've opened up the door to censorship based on offense, which is a sign that you've failed.

          • (Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 26 2016, @10:36PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 26 2016, @10:36PM (#433423)

            NIGGER

            • (Score: 5, Insightful) by mhajicek on Saturday November 26 2016, @11:36PM

              by mhajicek (51) on Saturday November 26 2016, @11:36PM (#433451)

              Exactly. Downmod, yes. Censor, no. Defend to the death and all that.

              --
              The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 27 2016, @09:59PM

                by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 27 2016, @09:59PM (#433774)

                generally i try to reply, then downmod. censoring is best left for others; before I censor something I'll have found a new venue. Let the people I want to censor talk amongst themselves if I have grown out of the bubble they are in.

          • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Saturday November 26 2016, @10:50PM

            by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Saturday November 26 2016, @10:50PM (#433435) Journal

            Nope. No one gives a damn that you're offended. I can offend you all day long, I just can't call you a fuckwad on most venues. Fuck you, and fuck your feelings, little snowflake.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 27 2016, @12:07AM

              by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 27 2016, @12:07AM (#433457)

              So you say that they don't have the moral authority to "edit" most things, but they do have the moral authority to do so to certain words? It seems you missed the point...

              • (Score: 2, Informative) by Runaway1956 on Sunday November 27 2016, @12:29AM

                by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday November 27 2016, @12:29AM (#433466) Journal

                You're missing the point. The whole PG-13 point. It's a socially accepted norm, in the US of A, that you make some attempt to keep public boards "clean" enough for children.

                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 27 2016, @12:39AM

                  by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 27 2016, @12:39AM (#433473)

                  that you make some attempt to keep public boards "clean" enough for children.

                  Well, if you're going to act like children ...

                  • (Score: 1) by kurenai.tsubasa on Sunday November 27 2016, @06:19AM

                    by kurenai.tsubasa (5227) on Sunday November 27 2016, @06:19AM (#433555) Journal

                    Should I link some of the weird-ass sissy pr0n that's been posted lately to the TF fiction board I go to? I mean, I don't read those since I prefer the stories about strong women and Amazons. Even just the summaries are weird—like people who fantasize about wearing diapers. I don't get it, but it seems to be where PC culture is headed. (Also see every iteration of the comic code, etc.) Diapers for everyone! Yeeech.

                    Even those “bimbocalypse” stories make more sense.

                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 27 2016, @01:39AM

                  by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 27 2016, @01:39AM (#433491)

                  I'm not missing the point. If they don't have the moral authority to censor more serious subject matters, then I don't see why they would have the moral authority to censor specific words that may cause offense. If they have the moral authority to do the latter, then anything offensive could be censored. Socially accepted norms are irrelevant, because it sounds like you were describing a personal standard ("moral authority").

                  • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Sunday November 27 2016, @01:55AM

                    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday November 27 2016, @01:55AM (#433497) Journal

                    PG-13 isn't my personal standard. Which century are you posting from? If you're posting from the 18th century, then I can understand that you don't understand PG-13, or R, or the X's. There are limits to the things that may be posted to forums accessible by children. Now, if you locked your own kids in the closet years back, then I can understand your lack of concern about the content on public forums.

                    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by janrinok on Sunday November 27 2016, @10:13AM

                      by janrinok (52) Subscriber Badge on Sunday November 27 2016, @10:13AM (#433595) Journal

                      I just happen to believe that it is a parents' job and responsibility to raise their children, not the state's. Children will access things that you might not wish them to see no matter what measures you take. Far better then to teach them responsibility, to feel that they can always turn to their parents for honest advice on any topic, and to let them mature into decent adults with no hang-ups.

                    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 29 2016, @02:25AM

                      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 29 2016, @02:25AM (#434314)

                      You said: "I don't believe that any major online site really has any moral authority to edit much more than the "seven words you'll never hear on television"." Notice the "I". You were clearly talking about your standard. I see absolutely no reason that major online sites would have the moral authority to censor words you or others don't like but would not have the moral authority to censor opinions you or others don't like. It's incredibly silly, because either way you're just censoring to protect people's feelings.

                      • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday November 29 2016, @05:15AM

                        by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday November 29 2016, @05:15AM (#434351) Journal

                        Well - if you don't see the difference between vulgarity, and opinion, then you just don't see it. Even congress and parliaments around the world exchange ideas and thoughts freely, but they aren't free to curse members. The word that applies is "decorum". If you and I call each other stupid sons of bitches, that adds nothing to the exchange of ideas - it's nonsense. Why bother with it? Yeah, I guess I do indulge now and then in nonsensical name calling, but it adds nothing to the discussion.

                        What matters is the free exchange of ideas, not the ability to insult each other meaninglessly.

                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 27 2016, @04:18AM

                  by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 27 2016, @04:18AM (#433531)

                  It used to be the law. Communications Decency Act and Child Online Protection Act, we hardly knew you.

                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 29 2016, @02:22AM

                    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 29 2016, @02:22AM (#434313)

                    Which were rightly struck down for being blatantly unconstitutional. Besides that, censoring things for children merely because some parents don't want their kids to see that content is highly unjust; any 'harm' caused by kids seeing the content is totally subjective and more than likely it's a personal standard of the parents. Let parents handle such things themselves, even if it is difficult.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 26 2016, @11:07PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 26 2016, @11:07PM (#433438)

          Such "great" commentary from EF and Runaway, its impossible to have a middle ground with some people on this site. Even condemning the censorship wasn't enough. So many times the conservative base has stated "its a corporation its their job to only care about profits" but now that the censorship is treading on your toes (not specifically any user, I don't care to spend hours finding who said it) suddenly its evil and must be stopped! That comment covers all the various fake news / censorship stories that have been floating through here.

          If you've never actually used a service fully then you are not qualified to comment on it as a whole. Reddit has a TON of subgroups that can be very specific, and a lot of people get very valuable info / discussions from it. However, it is definitely part of the propaganda machine with corporate users shilling products as if it is "original content" and not a marketing ploy, along with outright censorship. This sadly is standard for a lot of popular web services and my call for legislation is the next proper step we'll have to take.

          If we as a society can't come to agreement on how to legislate such censorship then we're left with joining communities that align with our values. Even with some of the outright garbage (in my opinion) that floats through here and derails discussion I still keep coming back because I value that freedom to spew. Even most of the garbage comments here would be top of the list on the "popular" reddit groups, but the more specific sub-reddits often have truly valuable commentary.

          • (Score: 2, Funny) by Ethanol-fueled on Saturday November 26 2016, @11:18PM

            by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Saturday November 26 2016, @11:18PM (#433447) Homepage

            So instead of posting on a niche Mongolian patesserie forum (don't bother telling us what to do, we have our minds made up already) you could be advocating freedom of speech on Reddit, where minds are much more impressionable.

            Come on, Fido, go ahead and make life better for the rest of us, will 'ya?

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 26 2016, @11:42PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 26 2016, @11:42PM (#433453)

              Don't mistake, I don't use reddit except for time wasting, I don't have an account or participate in the discussions. Doesn't mean I'm unable to see through your veil of hate and stupidity. I advocate freedom of speech everywhere, whereas you simply spread hate and anger with the occasional good point.

          • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Sunday November 27 2016, @12:35AM

            by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday November 27 2016, @12:35AM (#433472) Journal

            You weren't your mama's brightest son, were you?

            I'm not a right wing conservative Republican. I disagree with censorship. In THIS CASE, my toes weren't stepped on at all. In OTHER CASES, the bastards have infringed on my own rights. And, you know what? Most often, it's a left leaning site.

            For all of Fox New's faults, those ignorant bastards have never censored me. They've shouted me down, and drowned me out, but they don't delete or edit my posts. That whole authoritarian trip with censorship is primarily a left-wing, SJW, politically correct thing. But, thanks for playing.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 27 2016, @03:33AM

              by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 27 2016, @03:33AM (#433521)

              Looking in the mirror again? Or just speed reading making you think you understand something because you read words?

              • (Score: 1) by kurenai.tsubasa on Sunday November 27 2016, @06:27AM

                by kurenai.tsubasa (5227) on Sunday November 27 2016, @06:27AM (#433557) Journal

                I mean, look at this site. We don't even delete MikeeUSA's posts (or mine when I go full retard). If comments are being edited by people who aren't the poster, that tells me that I can't trust anything posted to Reddit as at least being somebody's authentic opinion. I'd say Reddit is free to do it; it's just a massive blow to any credibility that site might have had in the way of controversial commentary. I gather from previous comments that Reddit has other uses, which I guess if that's what they want to be, more power to them.

                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 27 2016, @05:25PM

                  by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 27 2016, @05:25PM (#433676)

                  Which is what I was saying. There is still value in the site, but people should be aware that the admins are malicious authoritarian dickbags. That was apparently too hard for the other two in this thread to parse. "Whaaa? You can have two somewhat conflicting opinions at the same time??"

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 27 2016, @04:13AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 27 2016, @04:13AM (#433529)

          I didn't grow up with a text message device in my hands, and the entire format looks stupid to me.

          Really 160 characters ought to be enough for anybo

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 26 2016, @10:37PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 26 2016, @10:37PM (#433424)

      What a brilliant rebuttal. I can see why people come here for intelligent commentary.

  • (Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Sunday November 27 2016, @03:03PM

    by maxwell demon (1608) on Sunday November 27 2016, @03:03PM (#433639) Journal

    Censorship is one thing. Covertly changing someone else's messages is a wholly different thing. That's enough for me to convince me to never post on reddit. I probably wouldn't have anyway, for lack of interest, but now I'll definitely avoid even if I should get in a situation where I might otherwise have considered it.

    --
    The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.