TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

Let's talk content. AMA

117 pointsby ssclafanialmost 10 years ago

20 comments

thisisdallasalmost 10 years ago
From the comments:<p>Q: In Ellen Pao&#x27;s op-ed in the Washington Post today, she said &quot;But to attract more mainstream audiences and bring in the big-budget advertisers, you must hide or remove the ugly.&quot;<p>How much of the push toward removing &quot;ugly&quot; elements of Reddit comes from the motivation to monetize Reddit?<p>A: Zero.<p>_____________________<p>His reply currently has -1022 points. The censorship of Reddit for advertisement purposes has been a topic of discussion in a select few subreddits for quite awhile. It looks like the rest of reddit is finally realizing what is going on.<p>I don&#x27;t have anything against it, people have to make money and with free services like reddit, the users are the product that is sold to advertisers.<p>What I don&#x27;t understand is, why not just admit it? From my ~20 years of internet usage, I have learned the one constant is you never lie to the internet.<p>Also, from the list of prohibited content:<p>&gt;Anything that harasses, bullies, or abuses an individual or group of people<p>This sounds like a rule that some teenager made up for guild forums. How in the world does Huffman think using something so vague as an actual punishable rule will turn out well?<p>Anyway, good luck to Huffman he is going to need it. I feel like voat.co is going to see a very huge increase in numbers during the next few months.
评论 #9900405 未加载
评论 #9900067 未加载
评论 #9900039 未加载
评论 #9900063 未加载
评论 #9900674 未加载
评论 #9900830 未加载
评论 #9901198 未加载
评论 #9901280 未加载
评论 #9900149 未加载
评论 #9900670 未加载
评论 #9901519 未加载
评论 #9901086 未加载
评论 #9900590 未加载
评论 #9901046 未加载
评论 #9900017 未加载
briholtalmost 10 years ago
This doesn&#x27;t solve the problem. Banning &quot;[a]nything that harasses, bullies, or abuses an individual or group of people&quot; is so open-ended that it could include minor criticism or it could exclude flagrant bigotry, depending on the interpreter. They&#x27;ve replaced the de facto policy of arbitrarily banning things they don&#x27;t like with an official policy of arbitrarily banning things they don&#x27;t like.
评论 #9900428 未加载
评论 #9900855 未加载
评论 #9900054 未加载
nlalmost 10 years ago
Prohibited: <i>Anything that harasses, bullies, or abuses an individual or group of people (these behaviors intimidate others into silence)</i><p>About time.
评论 #9900865 未加载
评论 #9900817 未加载
评论 #9900911 未加载
评论 #9903056 未加载
评论 #9900174 未加载
pervycreeperalmost 10 years ago
&gt;Anything that harasses, bullies, or abuses an individual or group of people<p>This is incredibly ambiguous. I think it is important to specify what exactly harassment <i>isn&#x27;t</i>, and explicitly permit that.<p>Most people claiming &#x27;harassment&#x27; are simply using it as a tool to silence and persecute people who dare to hold opinions that differ from their own. For example, the Twitter harassment trial that just finished yesterday in Toronto. [1] Merely saying that one &#x27;feels harassed&#x27; should not count for anything.<p>Furthermore there is a problem with labelling certain communities as being problematic, or whatever word they are searching for. This makes uncommon or novel viewpoints vulnerable to further marginalization if their opponents succeed in giving them that label.<p>[1] <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.nationalpost.com&#x2F;full-comment&#x2F;christie-blatchford-ruling-in-twitter-harassment-trial-could-have-enormous-fallout-for-free-speech" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.nationalpost.com&#x2F;full-comment&#x2F;christie-blatchfor...</a>
评论 #9901319 未加载
评论 #9901015 未加载
评论 #9900973 未加载
comrhalmost 10 years ago
&gt; Anything that harasses, bullies, or abuses an individual or group of people (these behaviors intimidate others into silence)<p>&gt; &#x2F;r&#x2F;coontown will be reclassified. The content there is offensive to many, but does not violate our current rules for banning.<p>Seriously? &#x2F;r&#x2F;coontown isn&#x27;t harassing, bulling, or abusing a group of people? This AMA didn&#x27;t clarify anything at all, these were always the vague, sometimes enforced, rules.
评论 #9899997 未加载
slgalmost 10 years ago
TL;DR - We will still allow almost all the same hateful stuff we have previously allowed, but we will do our best to hide it so people will stop complaining.
tptacekalmost 10 years ago
They&#x27;re going to require a login to see the &quot;indecent&quot; subreddits. I wonder, are they going to take any other measures to make them difficult to reach from, e.g., search engines?<p>Will they run advertisements on &quot;indecent&quot; subreddits?
评论 #9900119 未加载
评论 #9900141 未加载
评论 #9900097 未加载
评论 #9900104 未加载
oldmanjayalmost 10 years ago
It strikes me that nearly every problem Reddit faces is a result of centralization and scale. The right answer is for users to go back to a self-hosted model, which will never happen because people follow crowds instinctively.
评论 #9900697 未加载
评论 #9900698 未加载
arsalmost 10 years ago
&gt; “We need people whose stupidity clashes against our values.”<p>No. We don&#x27;t. Those people are a detriment with no redeeming qualities.<p>You can clash against values without being stupid.<p>But in any case clashing against the hivemind on reddit is quite hard, and boy oh boy the hivemind can be stupid.<p>If reddit actually want to make things better they can get rid of the downvote option.
评论 #9901327 未加载
smegelalmost 10 years ago
Not exactly the change people were anticipating.<p>In fact, I&#x27;m not sure there is a change.
评论 #9899999 未加载
评论 #9900224 未加载
评论 #9900007 未加载
kelseydhalmost 10 years ago
Reddit is in dire need of a UI&#x2F;UX improvement. The site is unuseable without the Reddit Enhancement Suite (RES) browser extension.<p>Honestly it feels like developers have not made a significant change to Reddit in years. Screw advertising revenue, Reddit needs to begin making improvements gradually to its user interface or else it risks becoming a dinosaur.
评论 #9900694 未加载
评论 #9900707 未加载
评论 #9900677 未加载
评论 #9900678 未加载
评论 #9900735 未加载
andrewstuart2almost 10 years ago
&gt; The reason we’re careful to restrict speech is because people have more open and authentic discussions when they aren&#x27;t worried about the speech police knocking down their door.<p>Am I reading this right? As in, we restrict speech because people speak more freely when they&#x27;re not free to speak?
评论 #9900625 未加载
评论 #9901087 未加载
评论 #9900724 未加载
评论 #9900148 未加载
Pyxl101almost 10 years ago
This Reddit comment (from the thread being linked to but not easy to see, at the time I write this) catalogs the various public statements that staff have made over time about Reddit being a place for free speech on the web:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.reddit.com&#x2F;r&#x2F;announcements&#x2F;comments&#x2F;3djjxw&#x2F;lets_talk_content_ama&#x2F;ct5r0ch" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.reddit.com&#x2F;r&#x2F;announcements&#x2F;comments&#x2F;3djjxw&#x2F;lets_...</a><p>It&#x27;s interesting to see what was said in the past and how it compares to the narrative today.
jewbaccaalmost 10 years ago
For very many habitual users of Reddit, the way in which it is probably most valuable is as the canonical general discussion forum of the web. An important part of the infrastructure of their perception and interpretation of the world around them, for pretty much any domain beyond the most incommunicably personal.<p>To read Reddit can be, in a surprisingly real way, like participating in a collective consciousness -- with all the addictive dependence [I say that in a non-judgemental way, not being able to come up with a less negative way to characterize it at the moment] that the type of speculative fiction which imagines such living arrangements usually predicts.<p>The practical side of this is that, for any given news event, cultural phenomenon, popularly-circulating idea, whatever: for these users it is instinctive to consult the reddit threads on the topic, as a deeply-ingrained part of their process for digesting and interpreting it. That those reddit threads will exist and have an active discussion on any given topic is a given. Even if the local source of a news piece has a forum&#x2F;thread of its own, it is fundamentally not the same thing.<p>It&#x27;s been, in a hazy golden age that may have never actually existed, something close a total function for processing the events of the world, big and small.<p>One day, there was an event, a dumb internet drama event, but one for which the primary Reddit discussion thread was displaying a count of 20 thousand comments -- but on inspection, every single last one of those was showing up as [deleted]. That was the start of it for most users. Many have fixated on the specific topic of that initial drama as the source of the problem with Reddit, and many others have fixated on this fixation as the source of the problem with Reddit.<p>But there is a general sense that this is growing, spreading, and mutating, and seems to be cropping up in places that are not strictly predictable.<p>For example, there are persistent rumours that several of the more popular subreddits for which the news would be directly and explicitly on-topic, are systematically removing discussions about various global trade agreements currently being negotiated. Is it true? Maybe, maybe not, but the trust is broken.<p>----<p>The main thing is (the perception that):<p>Now there is a partial function where before there was a total function. That is disastrous damage in an information processing system.<p>----<p>To these users, this is a very profound and frightening piece of damage, having extended a part of their cognition into this machinery that now seems to be failing. Panic sets in, which obviously means wild flailing at anything that pops its head up and can be in any way seen as responsible for the damage.<p>Hence, the reaction to Ellen Pao (and what would have been the reaction to Steve Huffman here, had he unilaterally taken a more extreme stance than he has here). Especially after she made public statements of purpose that were easily interpretable by these users to the effect of &quot;whatever else might be the source of the damage to your extended cognition, we intend to start deliberately doing some more damage to areas we don&#x27;t consider important&quot;.<p>----<p>----<p>Also important to understanding this:<p>To the users I&#x27;m talking about, the &quot;cognitive value&quot; of Reddit is not entirely about directly being fed opinions to take up as one&#x27;s own.<p>Many of these users find great value to being exposed to, they deliberately seek out for their own enrichment: idiocy, malice, counterfactuals, cognitive dissonance, debate (honest and otherwise), the whole range of perceptions and opinions. To them, being exposed to these things is just as much of the value of Reddit as the &quot;good stuff&quot;. And that seems to be the aspect of Reddit most strongly and immediately under threat.<p>Anyone who does not value this kind of experience (which seems to be a very large proportion of the people participating in this conversation at the most visible levels) is going to see any attempt to frame this type of content as valuable in any way as totally incomprehensible, evil, and malicious itself. So this part of things is pretty close to an impossible conversation to have in public.<p>----<p>----<p>(reposting a comment that I&#x27;ve made before, in a thread that was apparently soft-killed on HN)
评论 #9900634 未加载
interesting_attalmost 10 years ago
Am I the only one who didn&#x27;t see anything of value in this AMA from &#x2F;u&#x2F;spez?
cag_iialmost 10 years ago
Seems completely reasonable, maybe just a bit vague...<p>The only surprising thing to me about this announcement is that they didn&#x27;t already have such a policy in place.
xacaxulualmost 10 years ago
Pao has whatever the opposite of the Midas touch is.
Fuzzwahalmost 10 years ago
&gt; Anything illegal<p>Illegal where?
评论 #9901042 未加载
em3rgent0rdralmost 10 years ago
&quot;Anything illegal&quot;<p>That&#x27;s a pretty broad catch-all.
boards2xalmost 10 years ago
Hilarious. Spam is strictly prohibited, while hate-speech is tolerated, unless inciting. spam must be lethal. Anywho, I&#x27;ve never liked Reddit and like it even less seeing what&#x27;s going in there.<p>&gt;&gt; These types of content are prohibited [1]: &gt;&gt; Spam
评论 #9900748 未加载
评论 #9900641 未加载