Promote ideas, protect people

got_milk4 · 2 日前

This is a very abstract blog post - what, exactly, do the admins plan to do when complains of harassment are submitted?

rwbj · 2 日前

I believe you are intentionally presenting these data in a misleading fashion. I've already posted this on voat, but I'd certainly like to hear what you have to say about it rather than me just calling shenanigans without giving you a chance to clarify or show that my statements are themselves misleading or false.

First, here are the sources:

0 The blog post which references the survey.
1 Admin stating that "about 21 million saw the invite [to take the survey.]"
2 The survey brief mentioning "you gave us 16,817 responses."
3 The survey admin clarifying he truly has no understanding of selection bias. When somebody else brought this up he stated, "We were pretty careful about showing the survey invite in a randomized way. This is pretty standard survey methodology - taking a randomized, representative subset."
4 The "scrubbed" survey data in CSV for anybody that'd like to look at it.

Citing #1 and #2, 99.92% of people chose to not participate in this survey. For anybody here that might not be familiar with selection bias, it's the reason internet sourced anonymous surveys are simply (and literally) not used when seeking actionable data. People who opt-in to surveys without other sorts of incentivization (which itself can also introduce bias depending on which people are attracted to said incentives) disproportionately represent those who are driven to do so for reasons that are generally not representative of the userbase as a whole. For instance upset or unusually enthusiastic users are going to be more likely than not to take surveys on the quality of a site. Randomizing who sees the survey does absolutely nothing to deal with this when only a biased sample opts in to taking it.

Now for the more interesting stuff.

The above all shows a lack of technical competence, but it's nothing particularly surprising and I think we can safely invoke Hanlon's Razor. However, now we're about to enter into the realm of mental gymnastics used by people trying to validate something that is clearly unpopular.

"50% of people who wouldn’t recommend reddit cited hateful or offensive content and community as the reason why."
"3.25% of respondents cited hateful or offensive content as a reason they would not recommend Reddit."

The first is Reddit's phrasing, the second is the in context figure from the data itself. 93.5% of respondents actually would recommend Reddit. They take the view of a minuscule minority (which works out to 543 users in this case) and rephrase to make it seem vastly larger than it is. But this gets much more interesting very fast.

The words "hate" and "offensive" (or any variations of such) don't even show up on the survey.

The only way people could mention this would be in the free form response category. Unfortunately those responses have all been deleted from the public data, citing privacy concerns so it's absolutely impossible to verify or determine exactly how they're coming up with this figure. We do know that, citing their own report, there were only 111 responses to why people were extremely dissatisfied. So we're left to assume that the vast majority of these responses from people who would not recommend the site and find the content "hateful or offensive" actually aren't extremely dissatisfied with the site........

I'll sum up with quoting the Reddit admins' interpretation of these data that was shared on the blog post

TL;DR: We are unhappy with harassing behavior on reddit; we have survey data that show our users are, too. So we’ve improved our practices to better curb harassment of individuals on reddit.

Lies, damned lies, and statistics.

intellos · 2 日前

I'm a bit confused. What actually changed here? Was Harassment not already against the rules?

overallprettyaverage · 2 日前

Still waiting on some word on the state of shadow banning

phyzome · 2 日前

organic content

You've been spending too much time with marketing folks. :-P

70616c616b6b6164616e · 2 日前

What if it's the mods of a subreddit (like /r/india) doing the harassment?

Kalium · 2 日前

Looking at the comments, and what's been upvoted, it becomes clear to me that there is a problem. Reflexive cynicism and distrust rule the day.

/u/kn0thing and /u/5days it seems that Reddit has lost the enthusiastic trust and support of its community. How do you plan to address this?

vehementsquirrel · 2 日前

When will you clarify what constitutes brigading? Will you continue to ban people in secret for rules that are kept hidden from the users?

With regard to the new harassment rule, what remedy will Reddit admins employ against users accused of harassment? Will they also be shadowbanned, or will they be told they were banned and given an opportunity to respond to the accusation?

FauxBoDo · 2 日前

Next blog post - "Announcing our Partnership With Hooli: Making the World a Better Place"

cj_would_lovethis · 2 日前

Based on your own data, 35% of the complaints from extremely dissatisfied users were about heavy handed moderation and censorship

What is being done about that?

RaiderInRed505 · 2 日前

Buzzwords. Corporate buzzwords everywhere.

ApexRedditr · 1 日前

You're killing the site. You think you're too big to suffer from the same fate Digg did, but you're not.

For a while now you've been changing the way the site operates that go against the fundamentals on which this sites majority users rely on to satiate the few and the media.

I think it's incredibly clear that your users disagree with the direction you're taking and if you continue, you are guaranteed, just like Digg, to lose a significant portion of your user base. You can't sell ad space or reddit gold if there's no one around to see it.

cjcrashoveride · 2 日前

Wouldn't the easier solution have just been to make the report button actually, ya know, do something?

danheskett · 2 日前

It's odd to have a post one day from admin's about transparency, and then the next day, have an entire new post which involves new rules that are nearly 100% opaque.

The definition of harassment is so vague as to be useless, as are the penalties.

K_Lobstah · 2 日前

So this will be enforced by admin, but how is reporting of it handled? Just modmail to /r/reddit.com? Are there plans to increase the efficiency or response rate for messages sent there? Will moderator reports of other users being harassed be given the same level of attention?

The vast majority of subscribers aren't even aware they can contact admin. We receive reports of harassment in modmail quite frequently.

kvachon · 2 日前

So is stuff like /r/justneckbeardthings and /r/fatpeoplehate against the rules now? Systematic and continued actions to demean people which would make any reasonable person feel unable to discuss any ideas that might go against the majority opinion? Or is it more for stuff like http://redd.it/35vv1v or http://redd.it/35xc8d which involves stalking a person to see what they post about where and for what purpose, solely to bring it forward to a group of people to judge and demean said person.

Which of those is now harrasement. If none are, then what is a concrete example of it. Does it need to be reported to you by the person being harrased? Does the admin team have to decide that they consider the treatment harassment? What constitutes feeling "like reddit isnt a safe place" seeing as its website with text comments.

To be honest, it seems like this rule is going to open a new can of worms, not solve any issues. You should either not allow mean comments, or not moderate legal comments. Trying to find that grey area is going to require you to choose sides on infinite endless battles between groups of people that honestly hate eachother. I know reddit tries its hardest to be a safe and friendly place, but there's a sub-section of this site that wants nothing more than to hate on things. Culture, people, trends, politics, reddit itself. ITs a pretty hate filled site outside of saner places like /r/aww or /r/askscience. ITs one of the prices you need to pay when you dont require anyone to reveal who they are. You cant expect anonymous people to retain their inhibitions and manners.

Darr_Syn · 2 日前

The continued use of the word "safe" in this blogpost seems. . . ominous.

See, I'm a mod of a number of BDSM subreddits and the term "safe" is one that's used quite a bit and is talked about all the time. But it's also argued about.

Let me put it this way.

What about my subreddits? Is discussing my kinks, hobbies, and passions going to be seen as "threatening" or " fear for their safety or the safety of those around them" by the very action of existing?

Many people have issues with alternative sexual practices and can see what I, an active sexual sadist, do as unsafe and even threatening.

So should I be worried about being protected against?

The issue that this brings up is what is considered "safe". In the BDSM world we tend to understand that there's no such thing as being 100% safe. It's a concept that is mythical, and fictional. Sitting there at your computer reading this there is a chance, no matter how small, that you could be hurt, harmed, or even killed.

That is true throughout the world. Both online and offline. The world is not safe. The internet is not safe.

At best you can make things safeR, but never safe.

But given your recent announcement of transparency I also have to ask, what is the process for being deemed "unsafe"? Are people going to be told they are being unsafe? Is there an appeal process? What are the punishments for being unsafe? Are there varying degrees of unsafeness?

This seems like an ideal that sounds good in political-speak and on paper but can, and should, be questioned quite a bit before being implemented.

Mcsquizzy · 2 日前

What is with all of the reddit propaganda lately? Seems very unusual and out-of-the-blue for the random face-saving posts about how great Reddit is

ecafyelims · 2 日前

Reading over the survey results. I can't see where people were complaining about being harassed. I even went to the survey CSV and did a CTRL-F for "harass" and came up with 0 results.

I'm not convinced harassment is as big of an issue as you think.

Instead, like you say, the reason they don't recommend to friends is "they want to avoid exposing friends to hate and offensive content"

Well, offensive content can mean any range of things. I know a lot of people who are offended by the science behind climate change. I know others who are offended by LGBT in the public. I know a lot of people who are offended by nudity, in general.

I hope you're not going to start removing content based on reports of it being "offensive," and I'm scared you'll start shadowbanning users under general guideline of "harassment" such as calling out CEO's for misconduct.

Please tell me this isn't the plan.

chugz · 2 日前

Buddy Fletcher, husband of Reddit CEO Ellen Pao, is being described as being the operator of Ponzi scheme after his now bankrupt firm diverted money for their own use and, according to the Chapter 11 trustee, committed fraud against investors. Three Louisiana pension funds lost $144 million.

shadow bans for everyone.

itty53 · 2 日前

Systematic and/or continued actions to torment or demean someone in a way that would make a reasonable person (1) conclude that reddit is not a safe platform to express their ideas or participate in the conversation, or (2) fear for their safety or the safety of those around them.

What cracks me up is that this will apply to both sides of many arguments, but only one side is bound to get punished for it.

For instance: Is it safe for a conspiracy theorist to express their ideas and participate in conversation without being ridiculed? What about someone who thinks vaccines are dangerous? Or are those the dangerous ideas that need to be censored?

What does 'harassment' mean too? If someone calls me a name in a response, once (not-repeated), is that harassment? I've been insulted. I've been put 'in danger' of feeling insulted or harassed. Is this just a big 'be polite' rule? Because I've known plenty of polite trolls.

I'm not trying to defend harassers or anything - I've been the target of one individual in particular who followed and replied to comments as old as 6 months (and the admins banned him as soon as I reported him) - but the 'rules' that are being written here are vague and thus, flexible: They can apply when the admins choose and not apply when the admins don't. Which is exactly what's been happening, albeit unofficially. Now it seems it's official: Reddit admins will censor you and your ideas if they perceive them as 'scary'.

By this rule, it sounds to me that all the GamerGate/GamerGhazi infighting is banned: Those groups are both systematically harassing and demeaning each other. /r/fatpeoplehate seems a systematic harassment subreddit towards fat people (most of which are non-redditors).

And finally, I note that 'reasonable' is left out: All you have to be is afraid in order to claim you're being harassed. You don't have to be reasonably afraid, just afraid. I should note that most fears aren't reasonable at all. Nope, it says reasonable people. I wonder how they'll define 'reasonable'.

wantingsilence · 2 日前

The harassed can report their so called harassers, correct? Will the harassers get any notification or chance to defend themselves, or will they just be shadowbanned?

Dlgredael · 2 日前

This is having the exact opposite effect on me. I don't want to use reddit because I'm afraid that by getting in a disagreement with someone, they're going to report me and you're going to ban me. I have spent time debating people, which can be confrontational, and even though I don't take it to an extreme level I still don't feel okay with even participating in a debate anymore when your rules are so poorly defined. If you're going to come up with a blanket rule like this that affects everything, you could at least be clear enough that people can actually tell what it takes to break it.

velvetbunnyrabbit · 2 日前

You might as well include the key catchphrase "for the children" in there while you're at it, jerks.

tacticalbaconX · 2 日前

So vague, politically correct "safe zones" and corrupt cronyism for topics that make the Reddit owners look bad.

Got it.

X019 · 2 日前

Long time reddit user, (ex)default sub mod, blah blah blah. I've seen lots of stuff go through reddit. I've seen a slow shift as well. I see users with accounts under a day old shadowbanned because they're trying to get their blog out there. I've seen repost spammers on the front page repeatedly, I was here when the Digg exodus happened. I fear for changes in reddit.

Last week, we announced our internal company values, and we were proud to say: We value privacy, freedom of expression, open discussion, and humanity, and we want to make sure that we uphold these principles for all kinds of people. We didn’t announce them because we’d accomplished them, rather because we are striving for them.

...

Today, we’re making another change that we believe will help make reddit a better place for everyone.

It’s a major overhaul of the site, the kind of radical change that risks alienating longtime users even as it takes advantage of the powerful social tools that have revolutionized the internet’s flow of information. ... He says the excitement of the unknown and the fast pace of development reminds him of the old days.
“It makes it feel like a startup again,” he says.

Now, am I saying that your change here is as significant and the Digg 2.0 disaster? Of course not. But, they were sure of their changes would make Digg a better place for everyone too. Is harassment bad? Of course. But I don't know how I feel about you guys making some arbitrary definition of what deems harassment. If someone is harassing a user on a subreddit, let the mods deal with it. If someone links to some page outside of reddit, let the mods deal with it. If a whole subreddit is offensive to someone, tell them to pull of their big-kid pants and either learn to stay away from it or block it. I guess that I'm saying here is I'm worried that whole subreddits will be shut down in the name of "protecting the 'harassed'." and I feel that would fly in the face if your stated company values.

TurboSaxophonic · 1 日前

Promote censorship, protect profits

There, I fixed your little motto for today's doublespeak PR session.

risingstars · 2 日前

Have affairs, be a bigot, sue your employers over bullshiy, cover it up from reddit. :)

dummystupid · 2 日前

There's a lot of admin blog posts lately.

Not sure how to feel about all the "announcements".

ttifiblog · 2 日前

So are you finally going to stop SRS from brigading and harassing?

FalconGames109 · 2 日前

We value privacy, freedom of expression, open discussion

No, you don't. Freedom of expression and open discussion mean no censorship, at all. Whenever you say something similar to "I support freedom of speech, but..." you are basically admitting that you don't -- it's exactly the same as "I'm not racist, but...". You might support open discussion of some topics, but that doesn't mean anything about true freedom. If a government chooses to censor only discussion of its politics (I will mention this later) and allows open discussion of everything else, that doesn't mean you have freedom of speech. In fact, it means exactly the opposite.

We’ve always encouraged freedom of expression by having a mostly hands-off approach

Keyword being "mostly". Except you don't actually support it half the time. What about all those people who were shadowbanned for all that gamergate non-sense (for clarification, I don't support this gamergate movement but I also don't support the people against it; I am not in any way affiliated in its discussion). Why? Because the reddit admins disagree with them. Which is, let me remind you, how oppressive governments deal with discussion they don't like. Better yet, those same admins have also shadowbanned people contributing to the discussion of whether these bans should be allowed, which is exactly what countries like the DPRK do to deal with citizens who disagree with their ideology: they censor their opinions.

Instead of promoting free expression of ideas, we are seeing our open policies stifling free expression; people avoid participating for fear of their personal and family safety. Because of this, we are changing our practices to prohibit attacks and harassment of individuals through reddit with the goal of preventing them.

This isn't reddit's place to deal with these issues. In the real world, if someone says something offensive you have to learn to deal with it. One way to do this is to remove yourself from the situation or ignore them. Blocking a user (requires R.E.S.) who offends you is enough. If you don't feel comfortable putting your opinion out there for the general public, post it on a private subreddit. Censorship will not fix this. It will do the exact opposite. It will be abused so much that it will prevent any meaningful conversation from occurring. You may have your doubts, but we've seen this in the real world before. Countries with strict "anti-defamation" laws (such as Italy) regularly abuse their power and use it to censor what they don't agree with. This is exactly why we need open discussion, which reddit originally served to be a place for. But then the admins changed their minds and ruined it all with changes like this.

To the admins of the site: Say what you will about how this does not affect the spread of ideas, it still won't change the fact that you are wrong. These changes are undermining the original principles that reddit was founded on. Please remember that what somebody posts will always be an idea, and censoring their thoughts about another person is only censoring "thoughtcrime"; if someone thinks, for example, that all homosexual people need to burn in hell, that doesn't mean that they are going to do it. It is what their religion tells them, and censoring what they say isn't going to change that (even if they tell someone that they deserve to go to hell for their "sins"). For the record, I'm atheist and I don't believe any of that crap, but that doesn't change the fact that you would be taking away their freedom to openly speak their opinion. And doing so will just turn around this issue -- people will only be more scared to say their opinion once opinions that the admins are against get censored.

As a final note: Honestly, this comment will probably be deleted or I'll probably be shadowbanned based on how the admins have recently reacted to people calling them out on their bullshit. Good for you if you do it, whatever. I don't honestly care. Just remember that by doing so you are putting an end to open discussion on the website. I'll be happy to leave if changes like these continue. voat actually cares about openness. Take a look at their website and learn how to operate an internet community, because censorship is definitely not the answer.

2015goodyear · 2 日前

So no new features or anything, just a new policy? That could be good. Can you elaborate on the policy though?

What happens if someone is reported for harassment? Reddit staff decides whether or not its harassment and then..... removes the content? Bans the harasser? Shadowbans the harasser? What's the plan?

AgrippaDaYounger · 2 日前

Posts like these make me question whether the reddit administration really understand what reddit is. Reddit is a way to categorize content by subject, and then adjust visibility by vote, thats it. You are not running a social movement, the same abhorrent content found around the net works within this framework because it can be compartmentalized, allowing disparate subjects to exist within the same ecosystem. This has allowed gore and hardcore porn to exist on the same platform as the presidential AMA. I don't understand why you need to change (censor) anything except to allow reddit inc to try to sell a more cleaned up (fake) version of the internet to gain more users, when in the process of beginning down the path of censorship you threaten your very place within the market because reddit at its core is a very simple concept (easy to replicate; see voat shills) executed by users who highly value unrestricted speech and are critical to reddits success.

Is it really worth alienating your existing loyal base to draw in new users who aren't already interested in the existing model (product)?

matttrick · 1 日前

I welcome the hateful and offensive comment. It is why I come to reddit. No, seriously. Everywhere else, you get kicked out if you say something vile. I enjoyed this place because I need to hear the worst of the worst for perspective.

I am all for banning threats. But otherwise, back off. If reddit gets sanitized I will no longer come here. "Good riddance", you might say, but it is your loss. A forum without the full scope of human opinion is worthless.

backtowriting · 2 日前

So, how do you distinguish harassment from legitimate criticism? And how can that be done in a transparent way?

Personally, I'm not sure it's possible to always make the distinction. What may look like legitimate criticism to X may seem like harassment to Y.

Was e.g. criticism of Adria Richards after the dongle-gate incident harassment? All of it? At what point is the line crossed?

Okichah · 2 日前

https://voat.co/

AustNerevar · 2 日前

Protection from harassment...

Safe space...

Shadowbans...

You guys are just trying to run off most of the userbase, aren't you.

Don't turn Reddit into Tumblr. It isn't want the majority of users want.

NeonMan · 2 日前

So /r/shitredditsays usets will be banned pretty fast I guess.

Right?

I_smell_awesome · 2 日前

Why do I get the feeling that this is just a first step into removing downvotes?

rag3train · 1 日前

Keep moving towards that sjw hug box you so desperately want pao.

DeadGamerWalking · 2 日前

/r/ShitRedditSays makes it unsafe for me to express my ideas. Will you ban that subreddit?

alwaysthepessimist · 2 日前

The death of Reddit begins here.

moush · 2 日前

So does this mean that subs like SRS/SRD are going to be banned considering they promote attacking?

jexton80 · 2 日前

Well we to can help protect freedom of speech, we can vote with our feet and let this become the safe space in the same way that digg is a safespace.

blarg15 · 2 日前

Cut to Kevin Rose, quietly laughing to himself in an oversized chair.

Mrlagged · 1 日前

Good intentions and vague words pave the way to disaster.

lordlicorice · 1 日前

Fuck you, Reddit admins.

1wf · 2 日前

I hope we aren't trying to become Tumblr. The internet isn't a safe space. It never has been and hopefully never will be - safe is boring, heavily regulated and Brave New Worldish.

I don't like personal attacks either - but this appears to be your grounds to ban subs like /r/fatpeoplehate and /r/fatlogic or /r/CandidFashionPolice .

You truly didn't clarify what actions you plan to take to stop harassment. Its either a toothless policy OR a policy absent clear standards/transparency. . .

Ignitionmix · 2 日前

Here is a list of potentially worthy alternatives I compiled earlier (courtesy of /r/redditalternatives):

Snapzu - Very visual, lots of great articles and videos. XP and leveling adds fun and sense of progress.

Empeopled - Gives you more influence based on the amount of up-votes you've received. Use influence to steer future of the site.

The Needs - Seen this on twitter a lot, content seems a bit off (automated content maybe?).

Hubski - Old school, had similar attention to voat a few years ago. Decent discussion but few members.

Spreadit - Dark theme, doesnt seem all that different from reddit. Even the name is similar.

Hacker News - Lots of business and programming talk but can also find some good misc discussion.

Linkibl - No comment, seen it posted at /r/redditalternatives. Looks like pinterest for links.

Voat - Almost direct clone that cropped up just recently.

Lobsters - Techy invite only link sharing. Similar in look to hacker news.

neohephaestus · 2 日前

So you're finally getting rid of ShitRedditSays?

LeafRunner · 2 日前

Buddy Fletcher, husband of Reddit CEO Ellen Pao, is being described as being the operator of Ponzi scheme

~144 million dollars of a pension fund was lost

Ellen Pao is now accused of frivolous lawsuits to try and stay afloat and some other shit. Seeing as she is a CEO of a large company and has a fraudster for a husband I think it's safe to say we have a textbook ASPD/Sociopath on our hands

the_leif · 2 日前

Well here's something nobody wants or asked for.

i_lost_my_password · 2 日前

On the internet, as in real life, I value liberty over safety.

CttCJim · 2 日前

is it harassment if someone bans you from a sub you've never posted in? it feels like it is.

vexinom · 2 日前

There are SRS mods that have harassed people talking about committing suicide still on the site. What are you going to do about them?

Tank_Kassadin · 2 日前

Thanks Mom. I really wanted more people telling me what I can and can't talk about.

crash_matrix · 2 日前

Disclaimer: #GamerGate content.

I'm a little curious as to the extend of reach. This is pretty vague: "Systematic and/or continued actions to torment or demean someone"

I mean, /r/GamerGhazi seems to be a systematic, coordinated attack on the character of a specific subset of people based entirely on a political affiliation. Dissent and correction isn't allowed by the rules of the subreddit. Technically, that would fall within the above criteria.

I'm not calling for its removal - but this blog post raises interesting questions. And an interesting dilemma. It's one thing to say "we're taking a stance on threats and doxxing" - but the stated criteria seem to be wildly subjective. Ghazi considers me responding to their mod comments [which are directed at me] as harassment. On twitter and Tumblr, just a few dissenting responses are considered harassment. Asking for proof of an assertion is considered harassment by some (so-called "sealioning").

I'd love to see the admins' thoughts on these issues.

TotesMessenger · 2 日前

This thread has been linked to from another place on reddit.

[/r/circlebroke2] REJOICE BRETHREN! TODAY SHALL BE A HOLY DAY!
[/r/conspiracy] The beginning of the end; reddit admins will now censor any subreddit, submission, or comment which is found to contain "harassment".
[/r/ellenpaoinaction] Now you can get banned if you say anything bad about a specific person. I wonder if Ellen Pao had anything to do with this? I would imagine she's tired of everyone knowing the truth about her.
[/r/metacancersubdrama] The cancer has spread: Admins hate free speech and want to destroy it
[/r/subredditcancer] "Promote ideas, protect people" - All for the common good
[/r/thepopcornstand] Reddit makes a blog post announcing that they're banning harassment. The whole thread is full of butter.

^{If you follow any of the above links, respect the rules of reddit and don't vote.} ^(Info ^/ ^Contact)

DamnTheseLurkers · 2 日前

I wonder if I'm witnessing the beginning of the downfall for reddit. Safe place? This place got where it is now because it was NOT a "safe place".

All I see behind this bullshit is that a lot more censorship will come, anyone with dissenting comments will be labeled harassers and removed.

mobugs · 2 日前

Instead of promoting free expression of ideas, we are seeing our open policies stifling free expression; people avoid participating for fear of their personal and family safety

Does this mean you're finally shutting SRS down?

MattyB4x4 · 2 日前

TL;DR: Reddit will start censoring users comments if they are found offensive.

Hypocritical clowns.

LURKER_GALORE · 2 日前

It's impossible to make sense of this new policy without defining "safe." What kind of safety are you concerned about? Is it physical safety? I.e., the mods will only intervene if a reasonable person would conclude that, due to reddit's platform and due to systematic and continued actions, such reasonable person's physical safety would be threatened?

If it's not physical safety, what are you referring to? Emotional safety? Can reddit please elaborate.

GOU_NoMoreMrNiceGuy · 2 日前

why don't you do yourselves a favor and give us a list of all offensive things that are NOT "harassment".

because there seems to be a lot of touchy imbeciles who think that a difference in opinion qualifies.

and reddit itself rolls out the censorship hammer without any transparency on exactly what will trigger that and that capriciousness ends up extending to the mods of subreddits.

let's have some fucking standards of behavior for the people in power.

you guys need to do a lot more of self exposure before this reads as anything other than a self serving purging.

graffiti81 · 2 日前

So basically you interviewed SRS.

blog

調停者