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This discussion has been archived.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, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 12 2015, @01:52PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 12 2015, @01:52PM (#195394)

    The thing is that certain ideologies are far less tolerant than others, and its often the ones that pretend to be the most tolerant that are actually the most intolerant.

    That's like saying I know I'm OK, I don't sugarcoat things because I'm interested in serious discussion but the other side seems incapable of civility.

    Turn it around. What do you think the other side thinks of you?

    For instance, in Gamergate it was Zoe Quinn illegally issuing DMCA takedown notices against youtubers that werent towing the feminist line that really blew up the whole thing. But arent Feminists tolerant? Well they pretend to be, but no, not at all.

    Take another look at these tweets, [dailymail.co.uk] that included a top developer's home address. I'd have been scared too. I'd have called the cops as well.

      But maybe that would've been overreaction to a joke posting.

    The problem with feminism is that it mostly accomplished its goals a long time ago, so it has to focus on smaller and smaller details.

    Like the small detail of trying to be successful in a male-dominated profession without being doxed and getting death threats?

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +3  
       Insightful=3, Total=3
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 3, Informative) by K_benzoate on Friday June 12 2015, @04:14PM

    by K_benzoate (5036) on Friday June 12 2015, @04:14PM (#195444)

    If you want to have any credibility, AC, you might not want to submit as evidence quotes from one of the most shameless, self-serving, abusive, liars in the intersection of indie "game dev" and radical feminism. Brianna Wu has been outed as a liar several times. She has been caught forging threats against herself on Twitter and on Steam, making any claims of feeling threatened highly dubious at best.

    There might be a case to be made on your side, but using her is just pathetic this late in the game. The only people still defending her are the naive or the true believers. I'm hoping you're just unaware how horrible she is.

    --
    Climate change is real and primarily caused by human activity.
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 12 2015, @04:24PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 12 2015, @04:24PM (#195445)

      Link?

      • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 12 2015, @05:11PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 12 2015, @05:11PM (#195457)

        Collection of them: http://pastebin.com/tY523LLz [pastebin.com]

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 12 2015, @06:36PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 12 2015, @06:36PM (#195479)

          Jesus christ, links to links to llinks to links.
          Who the fuck has time for that?

          If the goal is to make a convincing summary then someone needs to summarize all that shit. Otherwise citing it just looks like an attempt to bury any argument under a crapflood.

          • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 12 2015, @07:30PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 12 2015, @07:30PM (#195499)

            > ask for evidence
            > receive evidence
            > disregard evidence

            Sounds about right.

            • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 12 2015, @07:40PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 12 2015, @07:40PM (#195502)

              > ask for evidence
              > receive crapflood
              > disregard crapflood

              FTFY

              I spent 5 minutes trying to parse through those links looking for clearly articulated proof before I gave up. I think that's more than fair.

              If someone asks for a soda and you hand them a bag of syrup and spray them with a firehose, they don't owe you anything.

              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 12 2015, @07:56PM

                by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 12 2015, @07:56PM (#195512)

                http://i.imgur.com/VRLD4sT.png [imgur.com]

                There's something, and it's only one link. If you want to bury your head in the sand then go right ahead, but at least admit it if you do.

                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 12 2015, @08:26PM

                  by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 12 2015, @08:26PM (#195526)

                  What is that suppossed to mean?
                  How does that prove she is a liar?

                  Since you failed to explain it, I had to spend at least 15 minutes googling trying to figure that shit out, what I think I see is Wu parodying the people with a hate-on for her. Asking if she "is a terrible person" is such dorky wording it is funny. Even one of the comments - left out of the screen shot you linked to [archive.is] - recognized it as a joke. If her laughing at gg'ers qualifies as duplicitious then all I'm left with is confirmation that gg'ers are thin-skinned.

              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 12 2015, @08:09PM

                by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 12 2015, @08:09PM (#195517)
                https://encyclopediadramatica.se/Brianna_Wu [encyclopediadramatica.se] Everything about Brianna Wu. WARNING: Encyclopedia Dramatica :|
          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 13 2015, @11:21AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 13 2015, @11:21AM (#195745)

            Here is Wu lying about filing criminal charges [archive.is] and how law enforcement isn't doing anything about it, which was later proven false [archive.is].

            Bonus points, here is evidence of Wu being in her cozy home [theralphretort.com] while crying about being "forced to flee home".

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 13 2015, @03:49PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 13 2015, @03:49PM (#195803)

              So, she gets a death threat, and then a bunch of assholes phonebomb and mailbomb the prosecutor saying the guy in question didn't make one? How is that proof of anything? You really need to look up what the word "proof" means.

              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 13 2015, @05:51PM

                by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 13 2015, @05:51PM (#195846)

                If you want to pretend you are that dumb, then you should drop the perfect grammar. It's an obvious tell.

                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 14 2015, @05:41PM

                  by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 14 2015, @05:41PM (#196198)

                  You're suffering from "true believer syndrome", you believe everything is proof of what you've already decided is the truth despite the evidence showing something entirely different. The evidence shows that its time to officially categorize you gamergate nutjobs along with creationists, flat-earthers, and AGW-deniers. Enjoy your delusions, but the more you scream them from the sidewalk, the more people will understand how crazy you are and ignore you.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 13 2015, @01:51AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 13 2015, @01:51AM (#195598)

          LINK?

          Where is a link from either a top news site (not some racist or gamergate hangout) or a mainstream news site?

          You don't have one. You have rumors, rumors, rumors, innuendo, innuendo, and slurs.

          • (Score: 2) by K_benzoate on Saturday June 13 2015, @09:54PM

            by K_benzoate (5036) on Saturday June 13 2015, @09:54PM (#195897)

            I found the Wikipedian!

            Tell me, how can we document ethical abuses of the mainstream media if we are only allowed to use the mainstream media as sources? This is exactly the mindset that has let the GamerGate article on Wikipedia stay so horribly inaccurate and biased.

            --
            Climate change is real and primarily caused by human activity.
            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 14 2015, @05:47PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 14 2015, @05:47PM (#196200)

              I thought it was about "ethics in gaming journalism", since when is gaming journalism mainstream? At any rate, you need facts, not frothing lunatics thinking every single sentence from your target is somehow proof of what you've already made up in your mind. The articles you nutjobs are claiming as "proof" are just as coherent as the TimeCube page, and backed up by just as many facts.

    • (Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Friday June 12 2015, @06:03PM

      by DeathMonkey (1380) on Friday June 12 2015, @06:03PM (#195468) Journal

      Unsupported Ad-Hominem, about par for the course....