The discussion here in this specific chain of comment started because I responded to this:
> I would like reddit to be a place for completely free, uncensored expression.
By saying:
> This is nice in theory, but it basically requires defending the rights of hate groups to silence those they hate.
Allowing the hate groups a home on reddit makes them feel comfortable. Deleting the hate group subreddits reduces their ability to silence others. It sends a message to both the haters and their targets that the hate is not welcome.
If it's a choice between censoring a bunch of evil bigots, and letting their uncensored speech censor the people they hate, I will pick censoring the bigots every time.
I guess that might be something to worry about if it starts to happen. But I think it's a pretty poor argument to say "well if they ban racism, what's next?"
Maybe it's not as troubling if it needs to be searched for. But it doesn't need to be searched for. It's everywhere on the defaults, that's the troubling part. You don't have to go to a specifically racist subreddit to see racism. You don't have to go to a specifically woman-hating subreddit to see misogyny.
I'm saying that it is everywhere. Not "I could find some hatred in some submissions", but "I could find hatred in any submission".
That's true, but it does make it clearer that they aren't welcome on the site. If Reddit deleted the subs that I visit and care about, I'd definitely feel less like giving them pageviews.
They wouldn't be, but neither is that hate speech limited to the subreddits that are dedicated for it.
I am 100% certain that I could go to the comments of any top post on pics, videos, funny, games and probably a dozen other default subs and find some hate speech with a positive score.
Remove the subreddits that these people call home, and they automatically feel less welcomed on the site.
There is no containment. There is a comfy room that the FPHers or the stormfronters can hang out in and pat each other on the backs, and then there are open doors to everyone else's room that they can just walk through and spew their garbage. Removing the walls just makes them less comfortable, it doesn't suddenly release them from a prison.
But there's obviously some middle ground between 'free-for-all' and 'only your subreddits' that allows for moderation of the subreddits that are literally evil.
> they will lose the tasty morsel they could currently be enjoying.
That tasty morsel of hardcore racism, rabid misogyny and all sorts of other fun hate groups, and the people that defend them because anyone should be allowed to say anything they want?
I don't understand why so many people think that getting rid of these groups is going to suddenly implode all the thousands of smaller, more focused communities that you mention.
> I would like reddit to be a place for completely free, uncensored expression.
This is nice in theory, but it basically requires defending the rights of hate groups to silence those they hate. It's hard to freely express yourself when there are people calling for your extermination, or treating everything you say as if it came from the mouth of a five year old.
Except that's not a fair analogy to what happens on reddit. Sure, the shouty horrible people have a corner that they hang out in, with couches and televisions and snacks.
But they're also free to wander around the rest of the store shouting whatever they want. They hang out by the front door with the greeters even! Up until now, Costco hasn't cared that they're providing a comfy space for these loudmouthed assholes to congregate.
You can't just not go to the corner if you want to avoid them, you have to avoid all the parts of the store that they are shouting in.
Maybe admins don't want their site to be somewhere that stormfront considers to be their biggest recruitment center. It's not like the users who subscribe to coontown etc keep their opinions to themselves when they are using other parts of the site.
> Companies that 'actively look to correct that imbalance' make things worse and reinforce stereotypes with token hires.
Looking to correct the balance doesn't mean having some sort of quota for hiring women. It means getting rid of the bias that exists already, not tilting the scales in the other direction.
If I have a list of true statements, that is a list of facts. If some of them become no longer true, and some other statements become true, the facts have changed.
So what if some company did something similar to Zediva, but with a model where customers "buy" the DVDs and then sell them back to the company when they are done streaming it? Basically use first sale to set up a streaming service where you don't need to deal with licensing issues.
I pay $20/month for access to the servers and infrastructure. I get $10 of that to use as purchasing credit. Movies cost anywhere from $1-$5 depending on popularity, and the company buys them back for some small amount.
The company would probably need to have some system in place for dealing with people that actually want the DVD that they 'bought'. Maybe something as simple as letting people know that they own the DVD, but the company is not responsible for shipping it to them. If the customer wants to come pick it up at the office, he can feel free to swing by and have someone pull it from the data center for him.
Whoops, sorry guys engaged in the main attraction, opening up a 98 year old time capsule is too boring for this audience. Go backstage and come back later to tell us what the interesting stuff was.
I feel like this could have been organized better, maybe someone MCing the opening could have been getting people excited about each new item.
Is the text in italics from an earlier version of the council's statement? The linked page seems to have language that is as supportive of the student's blog as is possible.
Player on the author's team still hasn't regained full use of his right arm after tearing his bicep off his shoulder. But at least they came in third place, so he can feel like it was worth it.
This looks really interesting. I've also looked at a few of the other virtual tabletop products out there and not been super happy with what I've seen. Making a note to myself to make a pledge later tonight.
Have you posted a link to this kickstarter anywhere else? A cursory search on reddit didn't pull up any results, and I think there are a few subreddits over there that might have some interest as well.
It looks like his argument is that somehow combining results from various detectors/measurements ends up with sigma > 3. I don't understand why that would be the case, but he isn't just saying 2.2 == confirmation.
Interesting, all of the 'subscribe' and 'login' buttons in the article area are served by the doubleclick network. So anyone with adblock enabled just sees a partial article with no indication that there is a way to access the rest.
> I would like reddit to be a place for completely free, uncensored expression.
By saying:
> This is nice in theory, but it basically requires defending the rights of hate groups to silence those they hate.
Allowing the hate groups a home on reddit makes them feel comfortable. Deleting the hate group subreddits reduces their ability to silence others. It sends a message to both the haters and their targets that the hate is not welcome.
If it's a choice between censoring a bunch of evil bigots, and letting their uncensored speech censor the people they hate, I will pick censoring the bigots every time.