Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Friday June 12 2015, @06:52AM   Printer-friendly
from the we-will-not-ban,-much dept.

The Washington Post:

"We will not ban questionable subreddits," Reddit's then-CEO, Yishan Wong, wrote mere months ago. "You choose what to post. You choose what to read. You choose what kind of subreddit to create."

But in an apparent reversal of that policy, and in an unprecedented effort to clean up its long-suffering image, Reddit has just banned five "questionable subreddits."

The site permanently removed the forums Wednesday afternoon for harassing specific, named individuals, a spokesperson said. Of the five, two were dedicated to fat-shaming, one to transphobia, one to racism and one to harassing members of a progressive video game site.

Unsurprisingly, a vocal contingent of Redditors aren't taking the changes well: "Reddit increases censorship," read one post on r/freespeech, while forums like r/mensrights and r/opieandanthony theorized they would be next.


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This discussion has been archived.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: 3, Informative) by aristarchus on Friday June 12 2015, @08:37AM

    by aristarchus (2645) on Friday June 12 2015, @08:37AM (#195314) Journal

    So we can expect more misogynist racists talking trash against the SJWs, right here on SoylentNews? Load your mod-cannons, people, it's going to be a rough ride!

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Flamebait=1, Insightful=1, Informative=2, Overrated=1, Total=5
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 12 2015, @08:50AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 12 2015, @08:50AM (#195318)

    White bitches are the worst bitches, you know it's true!

  • (Score: 2, Insightful) by bitrotRnotbitrot on Friday June 12 2015, @08:53AM

    by bitrotRnotbitrot (5444) on Friday June 12 2015, @08:53AM (#195322)

    Well I'm new here, I have a pretty strong dislike for SJWs. I'm neither misogynist or racist though, same as most sane people who dislike them.

    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 12 2015, @12:49PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 12 2015, @12:49PM (#195370)

      I'm neither misogynist or racist though

      I bet you're an excellent driver, too.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 13 2015, @10:13AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 13 2015, @10:13AM (#195728)

      Get on with the times grandpa, misogyny means criticizing any SJW narrative these days.

      • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 13 2015, @03:58PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 13 2015, @03:58PM (#195807)

        "Misogyny" has an actual definition, unlike "SJW" which is nothing but a meaningless euphemism used to attack people who disagree with the speaker, just like "politically correct". Go ahead, try to define them, you'll have your own personal definition, which won't match anybody else's, so those words have no real meaning - they're merely meaningless attack words.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 15 2015, @05:06AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 15 2015, @05:06AM (#196362)

          Oh my god, you cannot be serious. Are you honestly arguing from some unseen arbitrary measure of the legitimacy of words? Do you even have any idea how language works?

          There is no moral authority which gets to decide which words are "worthy" to exist. A word or phrase is born whenever two or more people decide on a shared meaning for it. You can huff and puff as much as you want, but the fact that it's used to convey meaning makes it word by definition.

          As for your actual "argument"...

          unlike "SJW" which is nothing but a meaningless euphemism

          I disagree, prove it.

          Go ahead, try to define them, you'll have your own personal definition, which won't match anybody else's

          That's not how honest discussion works. You don't get to demand that the opposition proves that your empty assertions are false.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 15 2015, @07:12PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 15 2015, @07:12PM (#196615)

            There is no moral authority which gets to decide which words are "worthy" to exist.

            Strawman. Who said anything about words being "worth[y of] exist[ing]"?

            unlike "SJW" which is nothing but a meaningless euphemism

            I disagree, prove it.

            You're asking me to prove that a word doesn't have a definition? Well here you go! [google.com] Nothing in the dictionary! Proof that it is meaningless.

            Still waiting for you to define this word which you assert has a definition, like I asked for originally. Burden of proof is in your court.

  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by cubancigar11 on Friday June 12 2015, @08:54AM

    by cubancigar11 (330) on Friday June 12 2015, @08:54AM (#195323) Homepage Journal

    The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

    Also look up "false dilemma" on google.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 12 2015, @11:51AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 12 2015, @11:51AM (#195361)

    Signal your enlightenment harder. Your SWPLness is laughable.