The Cellar

The Cellar (http://cellar.org/index.php)
-   The Internet (http://cellar.org/forumdisplay.php?f=8)
-   -   Social media censorship roundup (http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=34718)

Luce 01-24-2020 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by henry quirk (Post 1045415)
The employers (the private citizens) know the employees (the elected folk) are fuckin' around. Some care, many don't.

Domestication.

Naw, I mean employers.

Corporations. Small business. Whatever.

Humans are not meant to be farmed?

henry quirk 01-24-2020 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luce (Post 1045419)
Humans are not meant to be farmed?

Only when makin' Soylent Green.

xoxoxoBruce 01-24-2020 11:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by henry quirk (Post 1045404)
"The government is not only a regulator, but a participant in the market."

Yeah, it interferes up and down the line: as regulator, standard-setter, participant; as enforcer, as restrictor, as thief.

And the one thing it should be doin' (contract arbitration) it does poorly cuz it's mixed up in all the other nonsense I list above.

Not it or it's, the government is not singular, the government is an assembly of thousands of agencies, departments, and bureaus. You're making the mistake of thinking one knows what the other is doing when in fact they hardly know the other exists.

Luce 01-25-2020 01:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce (Post 1045437)
Not it or it's, the government is not singular, the government is an assembly of thousands of agencies, departments, and bureaus. You're making the mistake of thinking one knows what the other is doing when in fact they hardly know the other exists.

Companies are the same way, after a certain size.

The left tentacle never knows what the right tentacle is doing.

xoxoxoBruce 01-25-2020 09:26 AM

Some CEOs use that to make the tentacles compete.

henry quirk 01-25-2020 10:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce (Post 1045437)
Not it or it's, the government is not singular, the government is an assembly of thousands of agencies, departments, and bureaus. You're making the mistake of thinking one knows what the other is doing when in fact they hardly know the other exists.

Actually, gov is made up of thousands of individuals, employees, each and every one, all tasked supposedly to manage resources of one kind or another, each supposedly lent a certain amount of power to accomplish that management.

Shouldn't matter that this one doesn't know that one if all are equally pointed in the same direction and serve the same master.

The employees, elected and appointed, however, don't serve: they rule, and they do it under the umbrella of, hefting the Big Stick of, government.

#

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luce
Companies are the same way, after a certain size.

Sure. Here's the difference: companies can't jail you if you object and decline to do business with 'em.

Luce 01-27-2020 09:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce (Post 1045459)
Some CEOs use that to make the tentacles compete.


Yeah, AT&T started that in the 80s. It worked out well, by which I mean "That was effectively the end of AT&T."

Same thing happened to Sears.

Luce 01-27-2020 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by henry quirk (Post 1045462)
Sure. Here's the difference: companies can't jail you if you object and decline to do business with 'em.


You're technically correct. They have the government do that for them.

henry quirk 01-27-2020 11:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by henry quirk
companies can't jail you if you object and decline to do business with 'em.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luce
You're technically correct. They have the government do that for them.

I'll wait for you to foist up a single verifiable example of a company havin' the gov jail someone cuz that someone declined to do business with with that company...but I won't hold my breath.

Luce 01-27-2020 11:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by henry quirk (Post 1045555)
I'll wait for you to foist up a single verifiable example of a company havin' the gov jail someone cuz that someone declined to do business with with that company...but I won't hold my breath.

Ever get caught driving without insurance?

henry quirk 01-27-2020 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luce (Post 1045558)
Ever get caught driving without insurance?

If Progressive could have me arrested for not doin' business with Progressive, you'd have a point. But they can't, so you don't.

Luce 01-27-2020 11:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by henry quirk (Post 1045562)
If Progressive could have me arrested for not doin' business with Progressive, you'd have a point. But they can't, so you don't.

You are forced to purchase a product in their industry. So they get to keep the same percentage of a market share that is mandate to buy that product as they had prior to the mandate.

In other words, as each state made it mandatory, everyone in the industry suddenly made more money.

So it counts, unless you split hairs for a living.

henry quirk 01-27-2020 12:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luce (Post 1045563)
You are forced to purchase a product in their industry. So they get to keep the same percentage of a market share that is mandate to buy that product as they had prior to the mandate.

In other words, as each state made it mandatory, everyone in the industry suddenly made more money.

So it counts, unless you split hairs for a living.

So, if I go to trial (cuz I won't insure, won't pay fines, and keep drivin'): is it 'me vs the insurance company' or 'me vs the state'?

Luce 01-27-2020 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by henry quirk (Post 1045569)
So, if I go to trial (cuz I won't insure, won't pay fines, and keep drivin'): is it 'me vs the insurance company' or 'me vs the state'?

You vs the state. It is a criminal action, not a civil one.

henry quirk 01-27-2020 12:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luce (Post 1045570)
You vs the state. It is a criminal action, not a civil one.

Exactly: I offend against the state, not the business.

When I'm tried, and found guilty, the fine I pay is to the state: I pay no compensation to the business.

And, the final nail: if I have no car, then I don't have to buy insurance.

I get your point, but you're wrong.

Luce 01-27-2020 12:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by henry quirk (Post 1045574)
Exactly: I offend against the state, not the business.

When I'm tried, and found guilty, the fine I pay is to the state: I pay no compensation to the business.

And, the final nail: if I have no car, then I don't have to buy insurance.

I get your point, but you're wrong.


Well, yes, I suppose if you have the picture of corporations being good guys, as opposed to mindless beasts, and the government being bad guys (as opposed to a different kind of mindless beast) you'd interpret things that way.

henry quirk 01-27-2020 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luce (Post 1045575)
Well, yes, I suppose if you have the picture of corporations being good guys, as opposed to mindless beasts, and the government being bad guys (as opposed to a different kind of mindless beast) you'd interpret things that way.

The above ain't got nuthin' to do with my point.

xoxoxoBruce 01-27-2020 12:51 PM

Hey you guys, what's with the civil discourse? You're out of step with the internet, the nation, the world. :lol:

Luce 01-27-2020 01:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce (Post 1045578)
Hey you guys, what's with the civil discourse? You're out of step with the internet, the nation, the world. :lol:

I am banned from Facebook and all but two forums, this being one of them.

So I'm on my absolute best behavior.

henry quirk 01-27-2020 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luce (Post 1045580)
I am banned from Facebook and all but two forums, this being one of them.

So I'm on my absolute best behavior.

And me: I don't give enough of a shit about the subject to get riled.

We can conclude: fear & apathy can make for a good simulation of civility.

Luce 01-27-2020 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by henry quirk (Post 1045589)
And me: I don't give enough of a shit about the subject to get riled.

We can conclude: fear & apathy can make for a good simulation of civility.

Well, not so much fear as "if I get banned from the last two places, I might have to go outside," and nobody wants that.

Aversion. That's the word I'm looking for.

henry quirk 01-27-2020 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luce (Post 1045591)
Well, not so much fear as "if I get banned from the last two places, I might have to go outside," and nobody wants that.

Aversion. That's the word I'm looking for.

😆

I stand corrected: 👍🏻

Luce 01-28-2020 09:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by henry quirk (Post 1045596)
😆

I stand corrected: 👍🏻

It's all about branding.

henry quirk 01-28-2020 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luce (Post 1045637)
It's all about branding.

Aversion plays better than fear.

Luce 01-28-2020 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by henry quirk (Post 1045651)
Aversion plays better than fear.

Well, yes. You can have an aversion without having fear, but not the other way around.

tw 01-28-2020 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luce (Post 1045637)
It's all about branding.

Wouldn't a tattoo be less painful?

Griff 01-29-2020 06:32 AM

That would show a lack of commitment.

Undertoad 02-01-2020 09:24 AM

Reddit "quarantined" /r/Wuhan_Flu, which means you can read it but the "official word" is that it's ungood. (The irony that they call it "quarantining" is not lost.) Please overlook the $150,000,000 investment a Chinese tech firm made in Reddit months ago. Surely that would not affect how they manage the site. LOL.

(Also, aside from the crappy management and moderation, Reddit is slowly turning into shit as teens invade it. That is just my opinion)

Zero Hedge was banned from Twitter for Wuhan-related journalism. It has been noticed that many social media bans come shortly after Buzzfeed calls a PR department, and says they are going to run a story on a user, and "would you like to comment"? In this case it came after Buzzfeed wrote a story alleging that Zero Hedge doxxed a Chinese researcher. Zero Hedge disagrees.

Clodfobble 02-01-2020 10:31 AM

I read the whole Zero Hedge article. IMHO, they are engaged in incitement that doesn't help the situation and deserved a temporary ban.

First, knowing where the virus came from--specifically, whether it was a natural species-jump or an accidental/intentional leak from a biological weapons lab as Zero Hedge alleges--is necessary in the long-term, but it doesn't make a difference right now when it comes to containing and treating it. Righteous anger and due punishment can only prevent future problems, not deal with current ones.

Second, let's say this one scientist did have "answers" to give. Those answers would have to be legitimately received/extracted by people with power to have any meaning. If I, an angry American citizen, call his personal number a thousand times a day until he relents and says, "You're right! I totally developed this virus and it escaped!"... then what? I call my Senator? I fly over and punch him as he so richly deserves? I post his confession to the internet so other people can go over and punch him, too? I create an outcry so big that the Chinese government is shamed into publicly scapegoating him--which they may have done anyway, and may actually be a tiny part of the truth that they are happy to concede, and in any case can spin a thousand ways to their own purposes?

Third, it's completely disingenuous to claim "the contact information was public so it isn't doxxing." The word fire is just a word, too, until it's shouted in a crowded theater. Context matters. Zero Hedge told their hordes of followers that this one person needed interrogating, and posted his name, picture, address, and phone number precisely because they know the response would be much lower if their readers were expected to seek out that information on their own. The main feature of doxxing is that it bypasses the natural selection of lethargy--and that's precisely what Zero Hedge intended to happen here.

General rule of thumb: if it's a "call to action" of any kind, it's not news, it's incitement. The only judgment call to be made is whether that incitement is beneficial to the individual, society, or neither.

Flint 02-01-2020 01:24 PM

I didn't read the article and I'm not going to. Doxxing is bad. People who do it should be drawn and quartered. If you support it you're an asshole.

Undertoad 02-01-2020 01:53 PM

You are right, partially IMO -- just my few quibbles --

Quote:

If I, an angry American citizen, call his personal number a thousand times a day until he relents
You speak Mandarin! I'm not surprised.

Quote:

told their hordes of followers
As a writer, I think you should carefully reconsider both this description of what Zero Hedge did, and who their readership is. (It includes Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey)

Especially if your readership is interested in an unorthodox point of view -- and what worthwhile readership isn't? You would not want them, and your relationship to them, described that way.

Quote:

and that's precisely what Zero Hedge intended to happen here
I don't share your superpower of immediately knowing secret intentions in detail.

But I think, if harassment was the intent, they would put the guy's number right on Twitter. Instead, they put it at the very bottom of a very long post, at what appears to be an excellent vector of information. I figured the point was to encourage better original reporting.

Quote:

Righteous anger and due punishment can only prevent future problems, not deal with current ones.
I'm okay with only preventing future problems.

And it's still a gray area, innit? If I think a gummint official is lying, or, say, I dunno, Tucker Carlson - surely I can give out their office number. But definitely not their home number.

xoxoxoBruce 02-01-2020 10:14 PM

Seems to if the guy they are calling out did indeed create this virus and has been working with it before it escaped, he might know some weaknesses, some vulnerabilities of the virus, maybe even the best way to kill it. If that's true, then that information should be extracted from him and distributed. If it's not true, then this is a time wasting red herring.

Flint 02-01-2020 10:40 PM

Yeah I'm sure THIS is the way to get things done. LET'S HARASS THE SANDY HOOK PARENTS! LET'S HARASS THE DELEGATES WHO DIDN'T VOTE FOR BERNIE! HARASS A SENATOR SO HE WON'T CONFIRM KAVANAUGH! HARASS A VACCINE SCIENTIST UNTIL HE ADMITS THAT VACCINES CAUSE AREA 51 NANOBOTS TO CREATE CHEMTRAILS!

xoxoxoBruce 02-01-2020 11:05 PM

Who said harass him, if the story is true then the health people should find out everything he knows about the virus.

Clodfobble 02-02-2020 09:11 AM

But that's not what the story's author urged. He said,

Quote:

Something tells us, if anyone wants to find out what really caused the coronavirus pandemic that has infected thousands of people in China and around the globe, they should probably pay Dr. Peng a visit.
"Anyone" is not "the appropriate officials." And if, as Undertoad seems to be implying, the appropriate officials might in fact be readers of Zero Hedge, and the author only meant to tell them specifically to investigate this claim, then surely those well-informed health officials are capable of finding this guy's public contact information. The author put it directly in the article because he wanted everyone to have it. And the only use that 99.99% of his readership could have for that information is harassment.

Undertoad 02-02-2020 09:23 AM

I guess I'm the 0.01% since I could glean useful information from that detail without being interested in harassment.

sexobon 02-02-2020 11:38 AM

IMHO, in this instance Clod nailed it. It's a propaganda piece designed to encourage others to extort information from an individual insider, by putting that person on the defensive, without that person's information being filtered by the Chinese government.

The article is heavy on argument for a containment breach and the wording "(accidentally or not)" suggests it's targeting people predisposed to conspiracy theories with a motivational message. The article is light on argument for a natural mutation of the zoonotic virus; also, light on appeals for help from the expert.

Good propaganda pieces do have useful information to be gleaned; but, only that which steers the target audience in a desired direction. Not everyone will be swayed by it, sometimes not even most, as a handful who are willing to act may be all that's needed.

xoxoxoBruce 02-02-2020 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Undertoad (Post 1045882)
I guess I'm the 0.01% since I could glean useful information from that detail without being interested in harassment.

Yeah, me too. But I'm too lazy for direct action and I can see there would be people like this guy with an axe to grind.

Undertoad 02-03-2020 12:24 AM

China tells citizens to only share coronavirus news from state-run media, or face up to seven years in jail

Undertoad 02-03-2020 12:32 AM

Zuck started drawing a line in the sand!

Free expression — not 'censorship' — will best protect democracy, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg tells Utah audience

Quote:

In his appearance Friday, Zuckerberg said Facebook had deployed artificial intelligence and other means to detect and quickly remove content promoting terrorism and child trafficking or inciting violence. But he said a more worrisome trend was at hand.

"Increasingly, we're getting called in to censor a lot of different kinds of content that makes me really uncomfortable," Zuckerberg said. "It kind of feels like the list of things that you’re not allowed to say socially keeps on growing."

"And I’m not really OK with that," he said.

"The people who are criticizing and saying that more stuff needs to be censored are never the people who are actually at risk of being censored themselves," Zuckerberg said. "They have their ways of getting stuff out."

"I feel like someone needs to stand up for giving everyone a voice," he said.

xoxoxoBruce 02-03-2020 12:44 AM

The man behind the curtain will be very happy when he can blame the A/I Robot Overlords.

Flint 02-03-2020 02:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Undertoad (Post 1045914)

Well, let's hope this one dude who started a website for rating which college chicks are hot is the best person to be deciding the fate of civilization and survival of human life on the planet. Cross your fingers! I'm sure it's probably best to let one random dude decide these things. . . . That makes sense, right?

Luce 02-03-2020 09:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clodfobble (Post 1045837)
I read the whole Zero Hedge article. IMHO, they are engaged in incitement that doesn't help the situation and deserved a temporary ban.

First, knowing where the virus came from--specifically, whether it was a natural species-jump or an accidental/intentional leak from a biological weapons lab as Zero Hedge alleges--is necessary in the long-term, but it doesn't make a difference right now when it comes to containing and treating it. Righteous anger and due punishment can only prevent future problems, not deal with current ones.

Second, let's say this one scientist did have "answers" to give. Those answers would have to be legitimately received/extracted by people with power to have any meaning. If I, an angry American citizen, call his personal number a thousand times a day until he relents and says, "You're right! I totally developed this virus and it escaped!"... then what? I call my Senator? I fly over and punch him as he so richly deserves? I post his confession to the internet so other people can go over and punch him, too? I create an outcry so big that the Chinese government is shamed into publicly scapegoating him--which they may have done anyway, and may actually be a tiny part of the truth that they are happy to concede, and in any case can spin a thousand ways to their own purposes?

Third, it's completely disingenuous to claim "the contact information was public so it isn't doxxing." The word fire is just a word, too, until it's shouted in a crowded theater. Context matters. Zero Hedge told their hordes of followers that this one person needed interrogating, and posted his name, picture, address, and phone number precisely because they know the response would be much lower if their readers were expected to seek out that information on their own. The main feature of doxxing is that it bypasses the natural selection of lethargy--and that's precisely what Zero Hedge intended to happen here.

General rule of thumb: if it's a "call to action" of any kind, it's not news, it's incitement. The only judgment call to be made is whether that incitement is beneficial to the individual, society, or neither.

Zero Hedge is good for this sort of thing.

It's basically a boring version of Alex Jones.

Luce 02-03-2020 09:19 AM

While their intentions in this specific case may be good, they just gave the rumormongers a ton of credibility.

Undertoad 02-03-2020 09:46 AM

Right, one of the questions we need to deal with as a society is, shall we allow the shit-stirrers and conspiracy theorists on our social medias?

I say, sure. Everything is a theory until proven; you have to consider all the thoughts, in order to parse out what is correct.

Which is also somewhat true about news agencies we don't prefer. I may not like my neighbor's mean dog; but if I hear him barking frantically at 2am, that may still be useful information I can use.

Alex Jones spent time talking about some dude named Jeffrey Epstein, and alleged that this rich guy had a pedophile island, and he'd fly powerful rich people to it. It was deep conspiracy theory... at the time...

Luce 02-03-2020 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Undertoad (Post 1045929)
Right, one of the questions we need to deal with as a society is, shall we allow the shit-stirrers and conspiracy theorists on our social medias?

I say, sure. Everything is a theory until proven; you have to consider all the thoughts, in order to parse out what is correct.

Which is also somewhat true about news agencies we don't prefer. I may not like my neighbor's mean dog; but if I hear him barking frantically at 2am, that may still be useful information I can use.

Alex Jones spent time talking about some dude named Jeffrey Epstein, and alleged that this rich guy had a pedophile island, and he'd fly powerful rich people to it. It was deep conspiracy theory... at the time...

Well, not only that, but there is the practical side of it: "How the hell do you stop rumors?"

If the army can't do it, nobody can. In fact, the more you try to suppress rumors, the more they propagate.

Flint 02-03-2020 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Undertoad (Post 1045929)
Alex Jones spent time talking about some dude named Jeffrey Epstein, and alleged that this rich guy had a pedophile island, and he'd fly powerful rich people to it. It was deep conspiracy theory... at the time...

Alex Jones also incited harassment of a Sandy Hook parent until they committed suicide.

But I guess you can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs.

Undertoad 02-03-2020 02:54 PM

No, you truly cannot.

Luce 02-03-2020 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flint (Post 1045941)
Alex Jones also incited harassment of a Sandy Hook parent until they committed suicide.

But I guess you can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs.

There is really nothing good to be said about the man.

He's a vulture of the worst sort.

Flint 02-03-2020 03:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luce (Post 1045944)
There is really nothing good to be said about the man.

I will say, he is entertaining.

Have you seen the video where he says, in all seriousness, "God told me to.. DESTROY. JOE. ROGAN."

Unfortunately we've hit this point in our society where being attention-grabbing makes you a source of truth. Maybe that's the way people have always been.

xoxoxoBruce 02-03-2020 11:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flint (Post 1045948)
Unfortunately we've hit this point in our society where being attention-grabbing makes you a source of truth. Maybe that's the way people have always been.

That may be true but at least it was on a micro level where they would gather locals to run somebody out of town... unless they were black then lynch them.
But with social media and attention whore news, the mobs are a lot bigger like Charlottesville.

Undertoad 02-07-2020 11:06 PM

Netflix reveals the nine times a government has requested they take something down.

Singapore: 5
New Zealand: 1
Vietnam: 1
Germany: 1
Saudi Arabia: 1

They don't operate in China.

Undertoad 02-07-2020 11:14 PM

The actual list from Netflix

Quote:

• In 2015, we complied with a written demand from the New Zealand Film and Video Labeling Body to remove The Bridge from the service in New Zealand only. The film is classified as “objectionable” in the country.

• In 2017, we complied with a written demand from the Vietnamese Authority of Broadcasting and Electronic Information (ABEI) to remove Full Metal Jacket from the service in Vietnam only.

• In 2017, we complied with a written demand from the German Commission for Youth Protection (KJM) to remove Night of the Living Dead from the service in Germany only. A version of the film is banned in the country.

• In 2018, we complied with a written demand from the Singapore Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) to remove Cooking on High, The Legend of 420, and Disjointed from the service in Singapore only.

• In 2019, we complied with a written demand from the Saudi Communication and Information Technology Commission to remove one episode—“Saudi Arabia”—from the series Patriot Act with Hasan Minhaj from the service in Saudi Arabia only.

• In 2019, we received a written demand from the Singapore Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) to remove The Last Temptation of Christ from the service in Singapore only. The film is banned in the country.

• In 2020, we complied with a written demand from the Singapore Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) to remove The Last Hangover from the service in Singapore only.

Clodfobble 02-08-2020 06:11 AM

If that's the only thing Germany ever requested to have removed, then it's only because Netflix had already done some serious self-policing. They've gotten a little better in just the last few years, but Germany's censorship laws are still surprisingly draconian.

Griff 02-08-2020 07:10 AM

Bacefook has hired Jennifer Williams a former Fox and Friends producer to help "curate" the news, whatever that means.

Undertoad 02-27-2020 10:58 AM

Reddit banned several moderators of already-quarantined subreddit /r/The_Donald, and posted a strange set of rules for whom they would like to be the next moderators.

Understand, as a private place they can manage political matters however they like; but this brazen micro-management of a forum is ridiculous. I'm like, that's not how this works.

Separately, Reddit announced that they would ban users who "consistently upvote policy-breaking content within quarantined communities."

Good lord. This means they're doing data-mining to locate users they don't like!

My theory is that Reddit, which started out very okay, has lost its mojo over the last year or two -- due to an influx of low-quality users. I'm talking about teenagers, low-IQ shitposters, brazen keyboard warriors. Better quality users are departing, because why deal with all of that?

All these types are attracted to Reddit because its lack of real community; how it treats anonymity, how it fails to protect communities and instead tries to protect itself. How it does not support real conversation.

Reddit's answer to this is to create and enforce its own personal and, BTW, corporate cancel culture.

Bold strategy, let's see if it pays off.

fargon 02-27-2020 11:27 AM

I try to stay off of politics forums, and other such BS. The only thing I look at on Reddit is the BBQ and smoking meat forums. This morning I was looking at Fark.com and every tab I clicked on was either about trump, or Bernie. I haven't been back.

Luce 02-27-2020 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Undertoad (Post 1047434)
Reddit banned several moderators of already-quarantined subreddit /r/The_Donald, and posted a strange set of rules for whom they would like to be the next moderators.

Understand, as a private place they can manage political matters however they like; but this brazen micro-management of a forum is ridiculous. I'm like, that's not how this works.

Separately, Reddit announced that they would ban users who "consistently upvote policy-breaking content within quarantined communities."

Good lord. This means they're doing data-mining to locate users they don't like!

My theory is that Reddit, which started out very okay, has lost its mojo over the last year or two -- due to an influx of low-quality users. I'm talking about teenagers, low-IQ shitposters, brazen keyboard warriors. Better quality users are departing, because why deal with all of that?

All these types are attracted to Reddit because its lack of real community; how it treats anonymity, how it fails to protect communities and instead tries to protect itself. How it does not support real conversation.

Reddit's answer to this is to create and enforce its own personal and, BTW, corporate cancel culture.

Bold strategy, let's see if it pays off.

You can do shit like this all you like, just so long as you know that corrections happen.

Luce 02-27-2020 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Griff (Post 1046214)
Bacefook has hired Jennifer Williams a former Fox and Friends producer to help "curate" the news, whatever that means.

Curate is a technical term that means responsibility without authority, aka "you got left holding the bag."

Happy Monkey 02-27-2020 12:03 PM

How are the rules strange?

ETA: Legit asking, I have no idea what their rules are for that or any other subreddit


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:04 AM.

Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.