上位 200 件のコメント表示する 500

[–]Cheech5 1501ポイント1502ポイント  (2680子コメント)

Today, in addition to applying Quarantines, we are banning a handful of communities that exist solely to annoy other redditors, prevent us from improving Reddit, and generally make Reddit worse for everyone else. Our most important policy over the last ten years has been to allow just about anything so long as it does not prevent others from enjoying Reddit for what it is: the best place online to have truly authentic conversations

Which communities have been banned?

[–]spez[S,A] 2401ポイント2402ポイント x7 (2591子コメント)

Today we removed communities dedicated to animated CP and a handful of other communities that violate the spirit of the policy by making Reddit worse for everyone else: /r/CoonTown, /r/WatchNiggersDie, /r/bestofcoontown, /r/koontown, /r/CoonTownMods, /r/CoonTownMeta.

[–]Delphizer 1056ポイント1057ポイント  (190子コメント)

This doesn't look like a comprehensive list, and even if you constantly updated it here, it seems there should be some place that lists what subreddits have been banned and quarantined and what rules they broke. Transparency and all that.

EDIT 1 : As this picked up steam really fast, my "I totally know what I'm doing and know more than the CEO" off cuff suggestion is to output the database you use for the bans somewhere, this should be an auto updating real time list of bans, it's my understanding from minutes of web coding experience this should be fairly straightforward. :P

Maybe not top priority but I've seen a few call outs for something like that in many comments in many posts and it's largely been ignored. I'm assuming as it's been ignored the agreement is such a place won't exist. A comment one way or another would be appreciated.

[–]spez[S,A] 263ポイント264ポイント  (163子コメント)

When something gets banned the mods often attempt to recreate the same communities, which we try and stay on top of, so it's an ongoing process today.

[–]mcgillycuddy412 173ポイント174ポイント  (69子コメント)

How are they still allowed to be mods if they keep violating the rules? I feel like being a mod is something that you can take away from a user. Besides, they'll probably just create a new username anyways.

[–]philipwhiuk 84ポイント85ポイント  (1子コメント)

Hence why we need a Reddit feature for this.

Transparency is part of your ethos etc etc.

[–]AMarmot 212ポイント213ポイント  (24子コメント)

communities that violate the spirit of the policy

You wrote an update to your written policy on user code of conduct, and you banned communities based on violating the spirit of said policy?

Why didn't you just ban racism and racist communities explicitly? Also, why did you wait until you had new tools, specifically designed to deal with the situation of "undesirable" communities, and then ban them anyway? Were you waiting to see if you could bait them into behaviour that violated other elements your policy before banning them on these grounds? 'Cuz that's what it looks like.

[–]Number357 1984ポイント1985ポイント x4 (598子コメント)

EDIT #2: Side note, it would be nice if for once reddit could just be honest. If you want to ban /r/coontown for being extremely racist, then just come out and say so. You didn't ban them because they exist solely to annoy other redditors, enough of this "we're banning behavior not content" nonsense. You're banning content. The content may be shit and you may or may not be justified in banning, but at least be up front about what you're doing.

...

but not /r/shitredditsays? Not /r/AgainstMensRights? Hateful, bigoted communities that actually do invade other subs? Apparently only certain types of bigotry and brigading aren't tolerated here. I wouldn't have much problem with seeing /r/coontown go if your hate speech policy were actually fairly enacted, but this picking and choosing is the reason why many people were opposed to the hate speech policy to begin with. A former admin runs SRS and a former CEO mods a sub that endorses AMR, so can't say I'm surprised that reddit staff don't have any problem with those communities.

EDIT: Since this is gaining traction, I'd like to say this about hate speech: Hate speech is by its nature subjective, which is why banning it is generally a bad idea. Here is a 2.5 hour speech by Warren Farrell. In it, he talks about things like boys falling behind in education or the fact that males are far more likely to commit suicide than women. There is nothing hateful in that speech, yet the campus feminist group protested his speech in the weeks leading up to it. They tried to get it cancelled and ripped down the flyers for it, and finally staged this protest to physically prevent anybody from entering. Because to many college feminists, simply acknowledging men's issues is "hate speech." Simply talking about the fact that boys are 30% more likely to drop out of school is hate speech. Simply mentioning that men are 4x more likely to commit suicide is hate speech. Please watch both the video and the protest, and keep in mind that the people calling for hate speech to be banned are the people who wanted Warren Farrell's speech banned for being "hate speech." Similar protests involving pulling fire alarms to shut down talks about male victims of domestic violence have also happened.

The problem with banning hate speech is that not everybody agrees on what hate speech is, and a lot of people consider legitimate discussions of men's issues to be "hate speech" that should be banned. Which is why a lot of us object to bans on hate speech.

[–]AirPhforce 629ポイント630ポイント  (201子コメント)

I'm actually shocked you did it.

I was thinking for-sure they would just become an ad-free subreddit dedicated to hate hidden behind an 'opt-in' wall.

Edit; /r/Kiketown is still there. No ads for them, as they have been whitelisted by reddit staff for ad-free status, less trolls because you have to be email verified, and no spam bots because you have to opt in. You actually made life better for them. Guess I'm not shocked at all.

/r/kiketown got the reddit seal of approval! We did it reddit.

Here's some other racist subs that seem to have dodged the bullet. (NSFW Warning, and reply to this comment if you want something added or removed from the list.)

Here's the 'original list' that was supplied to me, the comment seems to be deleted though. http://pastebin.com/rWUTqVaH

Edit2; The fact that I'm getting replies like this

/u/WhitePride_WorldWide -22 points

I'm actually shocked you did it.

thats because hes a pussy whipped cuck. Faggot SJWs cant handle facts and rely on muh feels..

And that they are getting downvoted makes me think we're on the right track here.

[–]Warlizard 14ポイント15ポイント  (0子コメント)

Last week an SRS user went nearly four years into my history and posted this in /r/ShitRedditSays:

https://www.reddit.com/r/ShitRedditSays/comments/3fkp3m/010212_petition_to_ban_rrapingwomen_sorry_cant/

Taken with zero context, and without considering this happened in the midst of Reddit banning a few subs and /u/violentacrez getting doxxed, SRS users decided that I was tolerant of rape, or beating women, that I was lazy, a shit-poster, pandering to my "audience", suggested SRS users go to Amazon to see what a piece of shit I was, that I thought "rape" was "freedom of speech", and that I was objectively wrong and thought "freedom of speech" was moderating a website.

They hadn't bothered to read the rest of my comments, where I said "If this were MY company and these subreddits were on MY board, I'd delete them in a heartbeat, because I find them personally offensive."

I was banned from SRS years ago (not for commenting, just because one of the mods thought I should be -- that's their prerogative) so I messaged the SRS admins and asked for a chance to respond, considering this post was #1 in SRS.

http://imgur.com/Z8EJh1c

As you can see, the only response was "ROFL".

/r/Fatpeoplehate was created to mock people based on a subjective perception.

/r/Coontown was created to mock people based on a subjective perception.

/r/Shitredditsays was created to mock people based on a subjective perception.

This is their stated purpose:

"Have you recently read an upvoted Reddit comment that was bigoted, creepy, misogynistic, transphobic, racist, homophobic, or just reeking of unexamined, toxic privilege? Of course you have! Post it here."

They exist to mock and harass Reddit users.

we are banning a handful of communities that exist solely to annoy other redditors, prevent us from improving Reddit, and generally make Reddit worse for everyone else.

Your words.

Please explain to me how holding other people up to ridicule without even allowing them to respond is good for reddit, encourages participation, and makes Reddit a safe place to express our opinions and also differs from the subs you've banned.

[–]snorlz 113ポイント114ポイント  (19子コメント)

we removed communities dedicated to animated CP

What? That is not banned in your content policy. It is legal in the US (where the company and servers are), isnt spam, and doesnt have anything to do with actual humans so it violates none of the prohibited behaviors. I dont know what any of these subs are but banning it because you dont like it doesnt make any sense and undermines your pledges to make reddit a place for authentic conversation, which i take to mean free speech. These communities werent annoying other people and are probably too small to ever appear to anyone not looking for it. Why didnt you just quarantine them?

[–]jabberwockxeno 280ポイント281ポイント  (131子コメント)

animated CP

What does this mean, exactly? As in, like, drawings? That seems silly to me (Think of the fictional children!)

EDIT: Yes, that's what it was. I can understand that you guys don't want that content here (if I was running a site, I wouldn't either) but it does fall under you banning stuff you simply disagree with, which goes against what you said before.

[–]ANharper 129ポイント130ポイント  (23子コメント)

The problem with this policy is that it's not objectively enforceable. Anything can be interpreted to be for "solely annoying other redditors". CoonTown is/was a horrible subreddit, but this was the DNA that made this site famous -- the promise that it was a completely open platform without censorship.

If you replace the platform born of the promise of freedom, with one that openly espouses banning "undesirable" (by whom??) subreddits, you are turning this site into its own antithesis, an omnipotently curated, handed-from-on-high, top-down nanny state. ANYTHING can be interpreted as annoying or insensitive, if one's pressure group is strong and loud enough. Reddit was once a safe-haven free from pressure groups. Anyone's voice could be heard, because the admins were not the moral police, but just the nerdy tech support. Now you've made admins the moral police, and reddit a nanny state.

[–]Olive_Jane 139ポイント140ポイント  (36子コメント)

Animated CP

This is absolutely the wrong term for stuff like drawings or stories about the underage. You're calling drawings, writings, art, etc, child porn wrongly.

Child Pornography

Child pornography is a form of child sexual exploitation. Federal law defines child pornography as any visual depiction of sexually explicit conduct involving a minor (persons less than 18 years old). Images of child pornography are also referred to as child sexual abuse images.

Source: http://www.justice.gov/criminal-ceos/child-pornography

Can you speak on how exactly minors, or anybody, is being exploited or hurt by the content in subs like /r/lolicons?

[–]BizarroBizarro 214ポイント215ポイント  (95子コメント)

/r/CoonTown is going to be leaking all over the place in the coming days. Should be interesting.

[–]slyf 778ポイント779ポイント  (134子コメント)

This page (https://www.reddit.com/about/alien/) says that

Remember: "reddit" is always lowercase.

But your Content Policy spells it with a capital R, has this branding changed?

[–]spez[S,A] 839ポイント840ポイント  (126子コメント)

Yep, we're changing our style guide as well. It's a pain to start a sentence with reddit.

[–]bigblades 870ポイント871ポイント  (63子コメント)

This new Reddit is not the reddit I have come to know and love. All the other changes I could abide by but this will not stand. I'm going to need to get a new sticker now damnit.

[–]Theliamist 185ポイント186ポイント  (6子コメント)

Will there be a list of all the letters you will be capitalising from now on? Or are you just going to keep us in the dark? Transparency my ass.

/s

[–]bakonydraco 125ポイント126ポイント  (9子コメント)

I was on board and appreciative with everything else but capitalizing the 'r' in 'reddit' is a bridge too far. IS THIS WHERE WE RIOT?!

Keep up the great work!

[–]TheMentalist10 587ポイント588ポイント  (98子コメント)

Will you be sharing information about the communities which are Quarantined? Will moderators of those communities know if their subreddit has been affected?

Edit: Just as it's not immediately obvious, /r/Coontown has been banned

Edit 2: Here's what it looks like when you try to access a Quarantined subreddit

[–]spez[S,A] 280ポイント281ポイント  (77子コメント)

They receive a message, yes.

[–]booklover13 156ポイント157ポイント  (38子コメント)

Will there be a list of quarantined subs keep so we which have been quarantined? Will there be an appeal process for a quarantined sub or a way for them to be quarantined if they can make the necessary changes?

[–]spez[S,A] 49ポイント50ポイント  (26子コメント)

The mods of a quarantined community are not banned, so they can message us just fine.

[–]dapht 36ポイント37ポイント  (1子コメント)

/r/spez, could you please start a moderator/admin controlled subreddit that shows the names of quarantined subs along with the reason for the action? I think it would really help the general community if the users knew what content was being stopped and why. An official explanation would, in my opinion, curb blind knee-jerk anti-censorship reactions, since in the past we'd have no clue what was going on.

By the way, thank you for these changes. I'm sick of harassment subs showing up on /r/all! You're handling (our response to) this change very well.

[–]dwchief 265ポイント266ポイント  (51子コメント)

If a user is subscribed to a Quarantined subreddit, will it still appear on their front page?

[–]spez[S,A] 188ポイント189ポイント  (30子コメント)

Yes

[–]siphonophore 24ポイント25ポイント  (6子コメント)

It was gutsy to leave coontown be in their own quarantined place. Pao's "banning behavior not ideas" was simple to apply broadly. Your "banning ideas that make Reddit worse by offending" is a nightmare to apply broadly.

More than a practicality issue, there's an ethical one: free speech--a good rallying point for the front page of the internet--exists to protect unpopular ideas. Pao's policy sent the message that Reddit and the internet was firstly a vehicle for free speech. Your policy sends the message that Reddit is firstly a vehicle for victimhood--those that successfully argue themselves to be the biggest victims control content.

[–]ChangloriousBastard 277ポイント278ポイント  (126子コメント)

Under "Enforcement", shadowbanning is not listed. I know the list is not comprehensive, but does that mean that shadowbanning will no longer be used to enforce the rules as illustrated in the updated content policy?

[–]spez[S,A] 139ポイント140ポイント  (123子コメント)

It will always be a useful tool for fighting spammers, but we are working as fast as we can on more nuanced tools for users who violate other rules so they have a chance to learn from their mistakes.

[–]jpflathead 313ポイント314ポイント  (93子コメント)

exist solely to annoy other redditors, prevent us from improving Reddit, and generally make Reddit worse for everyone else

Clearly SRS is not even on the same continent as bad as /r/c..t..n but SRS does exist solely to harass people on reddit and their mission statement is to make reddit's life miserable. And you are letting them succeed.

SRS, and AMR are not there to discuss ideas. They are there to stifle dissent, police ideas, shame/slander/harass people and keep ideas they dislike from being an acceptable part of conversation.

As one example: explain why most of reddit now uses np links and srs refuses to use np links.

You can allow them to exist, but you should stop giving them preferential treatment, either out of cowardice, or out of cowardice.

[–]BillW87 230ポイント231ポイント  (21子コメント)

For the sake of transparency I feel like it would be best to make the list of banned communities public. With all of the concerns lately about the admins not being transparent enough, banning subs without telling us who they are seems counterproductive.

[–]zachlac 60ポイント61ポイント  (23子コメント)

Soooooo...shadowbanning? Do you shadow ban for violation of content policy violations? At what point in the list of punishments would this fall?

[–]spez[S,A] 30ポイント31ポイント  (22子コメント)

Right now it's all we've got, but no, I don't think shadowbanning is appropriate beyond spam.

[–]raldi 331ポイント332ポイント  (316子コメント)

I'm sure some of you are rushing to find the Imgur link about how ripping out someone's tongue doesn't prove them wrong, and that the real answer is to engage them in debate.

But it doesn't really apply, because nobody's tongue was ripped out. The bigots have already migrated to another site, and they're doing just fine.

Shockingly, it doesn't look like the conversation going on over there in any way resembles an intellectually-honest debate on racial issues.

[–]spez[S,A] 76ポイント77ポイント  (222子コメント)

It's more than that, even. We take banning very seriously, which is why it takes so long for us to do it. In this case, a small group of people were causing on outsized amount of harm to Reddit.

[–]kopkaas2000 135ポイント136ポイント  (129子コメント)

You're probably getting flooded with questions about this, but would you be willing to elaborate on the harm they were causing? As big as my distaste for racist bigots is, there's a strong narrative going on that they weren't breaking any rules / weren't harassing other users / were staying on their own shitty little island.

If you in fact just want to get rid of racist subs, it seems to me that just being clear on the issue would work out better. If it was indeed about rulebreaking, some more information would put the "they did nothing wrong"-narrative, and the implication of capricious justice, to bed.

[–]spez[S] -53ポイント-52ポイント  (111子コメント)

We didn't ban them for being racist. We banned them because we have to spend a disproportionate amount of time dealing with them. If we want to improve Reddit, we need more people, but CT's existence and popularity has also made recruiting here more difficult.

[–]TheoryOfSomething 189ポイント190ポイント  (47子コメント)

Honestly then it sounds like you need to update your content policy again because nothing about what you said just now is reflected in your updated policy.

You banned them because they cause you problems, so why not just make that the standard? It'd at least be honest.

[–]spez[S,A] -145ポイント-144ポイント  (44子コメント)

That is what I meant by "While participating, it’s important to keep in mind this value above all others: show enough respect to others so that we all may continue to enjoy Reddit for what it is," which is in the opening statement of the Policy.

[–]probably_quite_drunk 51ポイント52ポイント  (1子コメント)

Every time you explain the policy further, it applies more and more to /r/ShitRedditSays . You know it, we know it, everyone knows it. Yet you outright refuse to even acknowledge it in any replies.

Why is that? Are the admins covering for it? If so, why?

Does the new policy somehow not apply to them, even though they specifically fit the exact definitions you are giving?

Every time you ignore this issue, it only convinces more users that Reddit will not be transparent as claimed and that the hypocrisy is rife.

[–]babeltoothe 96ポイント97ポイント  (22子コメント)

So how exactly do you define being kind to others? Will you ban people who offend others with their different opinions? It's way too vague.

[–]relee1865 9ポイント10ポイント  (0子コメント)

We banned them because we have to spend a disproportionate amount of time dealing with them.

I'm sorry, but wasn't the whole point of this thread to highlight new content restrictions. Yet you're going ahead and stating that these subs were banned because...what? You didn't have time to deal with them? How much more arbitrary can you get?

The only thing this post has clarified is just how subjective and restrictionist the administrators of reddit are.

[–]fried_fetus 67ポイント68ポイント  (8子コメント)

We banned them because we have to spend a disproportionate amount of time dealing with them.

Don't see that one in the rule book.

[–]Xet 127ポイント128ポイント  (66子コメント)

Regarding Quarantining: Would you ever quarantine a large subreddit like /r/wtf?

A community will be Quarantined on Reddit when we deem its content to be extremely offensive or upsetting to the average redditor.

One could argue that the very gorey types of pictures (edit: and videos, like of people dying) that appear on /r/wtf would be pretty upsetting. I know I've accidentally clicked on /r/wtf images when I temporarily disabled my own RES filters, and honestly of all things on the site, some of the stuff there is more troubling to me than discriminatory self text posts.

[–]spez[S] -65ポイント-64ポイント  (62子コメント)

No, because the mods of r/wtf are generally good about tagging things as NSFW.

[–]Xet 124ポイント125ポイント  (41子コメント)

As a furtherance to that, what if a quarantined subreddit then just made all posts nsfw by default? Would the quarantine be removed?

[–]spez[S] -50ポイント-49ポイント  (32子コメント)

We considered this. That was the status quo, but it wasn't working. By making it more difficult to access, we can slow the negative feedback loop of: have heinous content, attract more people to contribute heinous content, Reddit becomes known more for heinous content than all the amazing stuff it does for the world.

[–]fried_fetus 114ポイント115ポイント  (7子コメント)

Well flagging cant be the true reason, all posts on /r/coontown were marked as NSFW.

[–]Shintao6 85ポイント86ポイント  (28子コメント)

Changing the conversation away from CT and SRS for a minute, why were Loli subs banned? They produce no illegal content or anything that violates the new Content Policy. They do not harass, threaten or worsen anyone's Redditing experience. I was fully expecting a quarantine, and would have been fine with that. I understand and respect that Loli is not everyone's cup of tea. I also get that it's your show and we play by your rules, but can we get the rule written down somewhere at least?

[–]spez[S,A] -30ポイント-29ポイント  (21子コメント)

They sexualize minors, which have been against our policies for a long time.

[–]Anonymish 32ポイント33ポイント  (1子コメント)

This is a difficult choice for you to make, but I think you've made the wrong one. Your policy regarding minors is clearly geared at keeping child porn off the site, and I don't think anyone disagrees with that. However, drawings are not illegal in the United States, and don't pose a problem for you from a legal point of view. Unlike actual child porn, they don't cause any harm to children (or adults). What they do is offer an outlet for those who are attracted to children. No one can help what they're into, be it BSDM or rape roleplay or consensual sex in the missionary position between married adults. The same goes for pedos - they didn't choose it, and shouldn't be demonized for that. It's another matter entirely to sexually abuse children, but if they aren't guilty of that then they have not done anything wrong. Subreddits like /r/pomf give them some kind of sexual pleasure without involving children, which is a positive thing. Without that, frustration builds and eventually might lead to actual child abuse. There are also some people who aren't attracted to real children, but who get off on the innocence and fantasy of lolicon, fantasies that couldn't be emulated in the real world and that they don't want to emulate in the real world, and it's not very nice to deny them this.

I feel like you went with your gut on this one. Instead, think harder about it. It's not harmful to anyone and without it, things might even be worse.

Side note, downvoting /u/spez will hide his comments and suppress discussion on the matter. Don't do it!

[–]Parasymphatetic 36ポイント37ポイント  (0子コメント)

What about stories involving minors in /r/erotica or /r/incest?

[–]illegal_deagle 926ポイント927ポイント  (387子コメント)

Unfortunately it looks like SRS will continue to enjoy their harassment and downvote brigading.

Edit: Come on, guys. I make a comment about downvote brigading and y'all mass downvote /u/spez for actually responding when he didn't have to.

[–]spez[S] -354ポイント-353ポイント  (331子コメント)

For the the time being we believe that brigading is best fought with technology, which we are actively working on.

[–]Synsc 365ポイント366ポイント  (194子コメント)

For the the time being we believe that brigading is best fought with technology, which we are actively working on.

What does that mean exactly?

[–]spez[S] -172ポイント-171ポイント  (174子コメント)

It means that we can see downvoting brigades in that data, and we are working on preventing them from working. We used to do this in the past, and it worked quite well.

[–]Ultimate_Cabooser 241ポイント242ポイント  (44子コメント)

That still doesn't mean anything. They're blatantly violating the "exist solely to annoy other redditors" and they make Reddit a lot worse for everyone who isn't them.

The "we don't need to remove them because we're developing technology that won't let them break the rules" could be said about a shit ton of subreddits that were removed.

I'm not in the "fatpeoplehate shouldn't have been removed"-circlejerk, because I agree it was shitty and was rightly removed, but the "it doesn't need to be removed because we're working on technology that doesn't let them break the rules" argument could have been used for that. If you remove subreddits like that, you have to remove SRS.

[–]spez[S] -93ポイント-92ポイント  (40子コメント)

We take banning very seriously. I believe we can combat negative actions like theirs by improving our own technology without banning them, so that is what we'll try first.

[–]warnerrr 22ポイント23ポイント  (0子コメント)

Dude, seriously? I've been here for a long time, and this is one of the most absolutely ridiculous posts you've had, barring "remember the human"(shudder).

You say you're going to be fair and transparent, then you update your guidelines to get rid of shit you disagree with, while at the same time continuing to allow other "less offensive" rule breakers (/r/shitredditsays) to continue to harass and promote harassment of redditors.

I've never been (afaik) to any of the subs that were banned today, and I've only heard of 1 of them, yet the one subreddit I have heard more about since its very inception, which DOES brigade, and DOES harass users, and only exists in order to harass others, gets a free pass?

You need to get your head out of your ass, /u/spez.

I used to respect the hell out of you and Alexis, but that's fading, fast. And I know I'm just one user, who doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things, but this sentiment is spreading. Fast.

[–]relee1865 86ポイント87ポイント  (14子コメント)

I believe we can combat negative actions like theirs by improving our own technology without banning them, so that is what we'll try first.

Why do they receive this thoughtful consideration and not any of the subs you banned today?

[–]Schrecklich 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

So what was different about the /r/fatpeoplehate banwave that made reddit think, "This is unsalvageable and this community shouldn't exist in any form on reddit" instead of "I believe we can combat negative actions like theirs by improving our own technology without banning them, so that is what we'll try first." Genuinely curious as someone without any loyalty to either "side" of this situation.

[–]babeltoothe 13ポイント14ポイント  (0子コメント)

What you're saying doesn't make sense.

And you know it.

You're really coming off in the exact opposite way we all hoped.

[–]probably_quite_drunk 47ポイント48ポイント  (1子コメント)

But your community does not agree with you. Which is becoming very obvious. Why do you choose to blatantly ignore this issue?

[–]missmymom 390ポイント391ポイント  (80子コメント)

Spez,

Help me out here please. In the content policy you define bullying as "Harassment on Reddit is defined as systematic and/or continued actions to torment or demean someone in a way that would make a reasonable person conclude that reddit is not a safe platform to express their ideas or participate in the conversation". I would say if someone is posted on SRS the sole purpose it shame and bully that person for the comments they are making (rightfully or not). I would say that fits under this definition does it not?

Also, was fatpeoplehate not banned for this exact behavior? We've seen SRS publish a list of usernames targeted at particular subreddits, wouldn't that also be a tool to help make this harassment and bullying easier?

I'm asking for clarification of the rules and how it appears at least they are not applied equally.

Thank you, Missmymom

[–]Didalectic 187ポイント188ポイント  (3子コメント)

We are banning a handful of communities that exist solely to annoy other redditors, prevent us from improving Reddit, and generally make Reddit worse for everyone else.

Please explain how Shit Reddit Says doesn't fall under that definition. Why did Coontown get banned, despite not even breaking that first criterium? It's insulting to your product to think we are unable to see the inconsistency here, such that not banning SRS also fulfills the third criterium: 'prevents us from improving Reddit.'

It allows the current atmosphere of hostility based on (perceived) inconsistency and bullshitting to continue and even grow deeper.

[–]Toucanzhigher 104ポイント105ポイント  (2子コメント)

we are banning a handful of communities that exist solely to annoy other redditors

It isn't just a brigading concern the sub was literally created to harass and piss off other redditors. But you're ok with some of that content so long as its more on the PC spectrum right?

[–]LukeTheFisher 82ポイント83ポイント  (2子コメント)

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Holy shit. Will the rules ever apply to those guys or will you constantly move goalposts for them? I like how "harassment" gets redefined just for that specific sub. Good job on the rest of the subs. Confused as fuck about the loli sub being banned though.

[–]musicandwords 301ポイント302ポイント  (71子コメント)

I am surprised nobody has mentioned that by collecting emails for quarentined subs you are essentially creating a database of users who read content you deem 'questionable'. What does verifying the email accomplish? This seems overly broad and Orwellian.

[–]Teh_Compass 248ポイント249ポイント  (273子コメント)

Quarantining is a good step from outright banning. But banning more subreddits in addition to that isn't going to solve anything.

Banning subreddits that break the TOS like harassing users and such makes sense, but you can't go and ban subreddits that don't, no matter how much people don't like them.

/r/fatpeoplehate, for example, was annoying to people but could easily be ignored. It didn't need to be banned initially. But I totally understand that it was banned for the brigading it did. I was subscribed to one of the subreddits that was being brigaded and its users harassed.

/r/coontown, for example is easily ignored and doesn't deserve to be banned, even if they are racist as shit. I hear rumors about brigading but I personally don't know enough about it. If there is evidence that they are doing something like that then by all means ban them. But just because you don't agree with them doesn't mean they should be banned.

You essentially run the site and can do whatever you want. But remember what the users want.

[–]spez[S] -474ポイント-473ポイント  (231子コメント)

We didn't ban them because we disagree with them. We banned them because this exist solely to annoy other redditors, prevent us from improving Reddit, and generally make Reddit worse for everyone else.

[–]xavierfox42 66ポイント67ポイント  (8子コメント)

exist solely to annoy other redditors

So you're saying /r/coontown brigaded and targets users outside their sub for harassment? The consensus seems to be that they largely kept to themselves. Do you believe otherwise?

prevent us from improving Reddit

In what way did they prevent you from improving reddit? From a technological standpoint? This doesn't make sense.

and generally make Reddit worse for everyone else

Again, if they kept to themselves, which they seem to have done, then there would have been no impact on "everyone else".

Edit: just to be clear, I'm not and never was a member of /r/coontown or related subs. They're clearly despicable people with reprehensible beliefs. I'm just trying to figure out what they did that was contrary to reddit's rules. I don't believe that the solution to racism or other hateful ideologies is to pretend they don't exist or to force them out. Separation and isolation only causes hatred to grow more strong.

My hunch is that /u/spez and others simply didn't want racist subs bringing a bad image to this site, and instead of coming out and saying so they used the content policy changes as an excuse to ban them.

[–]theimpolitegentleman 277ポイント278ポイント  (4子コメント)

Andddddd SRS fits every criteria you listed.

You guys need to stop fiddling around and be straight with the community with the exact relationship the management of reddit has with SRS.

You (collectively) have consistently Weasled out of answering any hard questions about anything related to SRS.

If you plan on ever making a sustainable long lasting entity through reddit the bull needs to stop and start acting like non biased adults instead of two faced bbs moderators who have an agenda.

[–]RealHumanHere 515ポイント516ポイント  (109子コメント)

That is the damn definition of /r/ShitRedditSays. They are constantly annoying, harassing, doxxing and following reddittors around the site and make us feel unsafe. They follow people everywhere, they link to their post, they brigade them. It makes us feel unsafe and afraid of speaking our minds on this site. And that breaks reddit's new rules.

Apply this to everybody fairly or people will leave this site.

[–]GammaKing 25ポイント26ポイント  (0子コメント)

If you're going to talk to the community you need to drop the PR spin. You banned them because they're a distasteful sub. Everybody knows it and no amount of handwaving is going to make that go away - meaningless, inconsistent ban excuses are something I'd hoped would end with the new admin team.

[–]dingoperson2 39ポイント40ポイント  (2子コメント)

We banned them because this exist solely to annoy other redditors, prevent us from improving Reddit, and generally make Reddit worse for everyone else.

Could you then ban /r/GamerGhazi for precisely the same reason?

https://archive.is/IbWYK

Reminder to sea lions: this is a circlejerk sub. Go elsewhere if you want to debate the merits of GamerGate.

Not too long ago there was a thread on KotakuInAction titled "Why I Can't Take GamerGate seriously", where a GamerGate neutral whines about how it's so unfair that he was never allowed to discuss GamerGate on its own merits in the sub. Despite, you know, that doing so is literally breaking the first rule of the subreddit.

Yes, for those of you lurking in /r/ShitGhaziSays, that means you'll be banned for playing devil's advocate, even if you are "neutral." The reason for this is simple: discussing the merits of GamerGate isn't our purpose. We are here to mock GamerGate because we find mocking ignorance cathartic. If you're coming in looking for a discussion, you'll be sorely disappointed.

[–]IAmAnAnonymousCoward 126ポイント127ポイント  (3子コメント)

We banned them because this exist solely to annoy other redditors, prevent us from improving Reddit, and generally make Reddit worse for everyone else.

That's horribly subjective.

[–]lhateapes 154ポイント155ポイント  (3子コメント)

We banned them because this exist solely to annoy other redditors

This is the definition of SRS yet you didn't ban them. I wouldn't be pissed about your dumb rules if they were at least equal for every side of the coin, but the fact that you only target the non SJW subs is just too much hypocrisy.

[–]IPhone6SroseGold 59ポイント60ポイント  (4子コメント)

Just a couple weeks ago you said attempting to silence ideas you don't like isn't the answer...

[–]omcagk 199ポイント200ポイント  (24子コメント)

SRS also exists solely to annoy other redditors. They encourage commenting on the threads linked there. Ban all brigade subs.

[–]missmymom 158ポイント159ポイント  (4子コメント)

Isn't this exactly what SRS is doing? It's purpose is to quote and shame people for the conversations they have on Reddit?

[–]WhiteFlight2 345ポイント346ポイント  (296子コメント)

I thought you were going to provide a link with why a subreddit was banned. /r/coontown, despite being reviled amongst some users didn't appear to violate any of the rules. It also did well to enforce additional rules that places like SRS flaunt. Why was /r/coontown banned, specifically?

[–]spez[S] -380ポイント-379ポイント  (278子コメント)

As I stated in the post

exist solely to annoy other redditors, prevent us from improving Reddit, and generally make Reddit worse for everyone else

[–]senatorskeletor 545ポイント546ポイント  (40子コメント)

I appreciate the general idea of what you're doing and I'd never defend /r/coontown. But "generally make Reddit worse for everyone else" is so vague as to have no meaning.

[–]SteelSaxon 286ポイント287ポイント  (72子コメント)

Which one did it break though? I don't believe it existed for the 'sole' purpose to annoy other redditors, and you haven't provided any proof of them doing so. In your new Reddit Coontown would be quarantined so I don't know how they can get in the way of 'improving reddit' and how can a sub that only had 20k(?) subs make 'Reddit worse for everyone' when most users didn't even know it existed or even cared. So how did it break the rules?

[–]WhiteFlight2 43ポイント44ポイント  (1子コメント)

No offense, but did you learn the "just keep pasting the same vague response to any question" from the Ellen Pao School of Business or what? Stop talking like a robot. "They had a post where they called for people to bother a person off-site" or "Honestly, we got some pressure from advertisers." Anything that resembles an actual person, please.

[–]TheSpekio 223ポイント224ポイント  (3子コメント)

So basically whatever you deem so. Thanks for listening about our complaints about nebulous regulations and doing nothing to clarify them.

[–]Jealousy123 64ポイント65ポイント  (7子コメント)

/r/coontown didn't violate any of those rules so stop lying straight to the communities face. It existed because enough of a minority of redditors disliked certain groups of people enough to create a subreddit where literally the majority of the content is complaining about black people. Not death threats, not plans for lynchings, not cross burning. Just getting on the internet and complaining about things black people do.

Hell, that in and of itself gives it a reason to exist aside from "annoying other redditors" which /r/coontown barely even touched when compared to other subreddits that you STILL HAVEN'T BANNED such as /r/shitredditsays.

Second rule, how did they prevent you from improving Reddit? Name one single instance of an "improvement" to reddit that was successfully prevented from implementation thanks to the 20k subscribers over at /r/coontown.

And as for rule 3, they barely ever interacted with the rest of reddit. Hell, I bet pretty much the only time they interacted with the rest of reddit were when their posts got enough upvotes to make it to /r/all.

So I'll say it again. Stop lying to the community and just admit that you're censoring ideas, not actions.

Place for free discussion my ass.

[–]Naked_Bacon_Tuesday 200ポイント201ポイント  (3子コメント)

Today, in addition to applying Quarantines, we are banning a handful of communities that exist solely to annoy other redditors, prevent us from improving Reddit, and generally make Reddit worse for everyone else. Our most important policy over the last ten years has been to allow just about anything so long as it does not prevent others from enjoying Reddit for what it is: the best place online to have truly authentic conversations.

If you do plan to ban subs, I'm sure reddit would enjoy an itemized list of ban reasons/offenses by each sub. This shouldn't necessarily include a link or something to an example of the offense, but the list provided should be detailed enough for a reasonable person to say, "OK, yeah, that's clear enough to require the ban."

But the bans should definitely be released and reasons for them made clear.

[–]pigeonburger 108ポイント109ポイント  (4子コメント)

I'm not going to cry for Coontown, but there's two things that worry me.

First, there's the absence of transparency. I want to see who gets banned, for what reason and I believe there should be a forum or a possibility for that group to appeal to the community or at least publically appeal to the administrators to get their sanction reversed.

Then, there's still too much vagueness.

"Extremely offensive or upsetting to the average redditor" - Who decides? This ties with my point above regarding the absence of transparency.

"Forming or joining a group that votes together, either on a specific post, a user's posts, posts from a domain, etc." - Does the group have to be explicitely formed for that purpose? Does incidental voting from being linked by another subreddit which tends to have similar feelings towards that post count? One could argue that being "featured" on SRD/SRS/BestOf/DepthHub is an implicit invitation for people to go and up or downvote the post in question. If implicit brigades are also banned, who draws the line? Again, we need transparency.

"Being annoying, vote brigading, or participating in a heated argument is not harassment, but following an individual or group of users, online or off, to the point where they no longer feel that it's safe to post online or are in fear of their real life safety is." - Thank you for mentionning the first part, but we've seen people who think that heated disagreements gave them PTSD. Which one has priority? Leaving the standard for "harassment" to be determined by the so-called harassed is easily gameable.

While we're on that subject. If we look back to the FPH ban; the images that were floating around showing that they were "harassing" were certainly very debateable. Will we ever have any public proof that they were engaging in harassment according to the guidelines?

[–]psuedopseudo 20ポイント21ポイント  (0子コメント)

I have to say, though I think the "quarantine idea" is a good balance, the ban policy looks a lot more like content censorship that anything else. If that's the way the site will be run, that's your prerogative, but it seems like we keep sidestepping the issue while simultaneously getting closer to bans for content. I know we've moved past the concept of reddit being a forum for free speech, but let's go one step further and approach this honestly.

How do you reconcile a policy strictly against "communities that exist solely to annoy other redditors, prevent us from improving Reddit, and generally make Reddit worse for everyone else" with the subreddit bans from today? If "offensive ideas" falls under this umbrella, why not just say we are banning offensive ideas? I feel like the language about harassment and annoyance is a thin veil, that started as a narrow definition but is now expanding to just mean "offensive;" I feel like I called this two months ago when this whole debacle started:

I guarantee this is what is happening. Banning the blatantly racist subs, etc, would be too obviously based on disagreement with viewpoints - they are moving slowly and widening the meaning of "harassing" subreddits as they go.

I don't really disagree with this decision, by the way -- I just feel like the reasons put forth continue to be disingenuous.

[–]LukeTheFisher 104ポイント105ポイント  (20子コメント)

Regarding the "animated CP" sub: This was a very odd choice for me. It's not illegal in most places and everything can be illegal in some places. It's on a similar level to bestiality legally but it's actually illegal in far less places. If they're getting quarantined for legal issues, what about the horse and doggy porn subs? Also it's not as if the users of the sub are harassing anyone.

Why this sub specifically? Have they actually harassed anyone? Was it just because of objectionable content? Why not target subs with similar issues then? Like the bestiality subs aforementioned. Seems weird to single out this one in particular.

Also: what about subs like candidfashionpolice? Those seem more dangerous to me in a lot of ways especially since people can't request to have their photos removed. Just a side question on this: I see that you guys are hosted by AWS. They have a compliance policy surrounding this I think, could someone request that their photo be removed from the sub in that way? Do you guys cooperate with them regarding that?

I'd appreciate any answers you can give me.

[–]Mobre 135ポイント136ポイント  (4子コメント)

Can you explain the difference between these two?

We will Quarantine communities whose content would be considered extremely offensive to the average redditor.

and

we are banning a handful of communities that exist solely to annoy other redditers, prevent us from improving Reddit, and generally make Reddit worse for everyone else

and how /r/coontown applies to the latter rather than the former? Because it seems that the application of who is quarantined and who is banned overlap and is completely up to the arbitrary decision of the admin rather then an explicit and defined rule set.

[–]Olive_Jane 106ポイント107ポイント  (15子コメント)

I'm sorry, can you clarify how hentai and ficticious drawings is child porn?

unwelcome content

2 While Reddit generally provides a lot of leeway in what content is acceptable, here are some guidelines for content that is not. Please keep in mind the spirit in which these were written, and know that looking for loopholes is a waste of time.

3 Content is prohibited if it

Is illegal

Is involuntary pornography

Encourages or incites violence

Threatens, harasses, or bullies or encourages others to do so

Is personal and confidential information

Impersonates someone in a misleading or deceptive manner

Is spam"

Does drawn pictures of underage, fictitious characters, really apply to the above?

Here is a definition of child porn that I found:

Child Pornography

Child pornography is a form of child sexual exploitation. Federal law defines child pornography as any visual depiction of sexually explicit conduct involving a minor (persons less than 18 years old). Images of child pornography are also referred to as child sexual abuse images.

Source: http://www.justice.gov/criminal-ceos/child-pornography

Can you speak on how exactly minors, or anybody, is being exploited or hurt by the content in subs like /r/lolicons?

[–]Facerless 96ポイント97ポイント  (4子コメント)

  • Encourages or incites violence
  • Threatens, harasses, or bullies or encourages others to do so

Are these going to be used against communities that are centered around the pre-existing hatred or dislike of a group or person?

I realize this is nit picking but this is still fairly vague

What constitutes encouragement or how will you decide what incites someone to action?

[–]CarmineCerise 239ポイント240ポイント  (86子コメント)

Today, in addition to applying Quarantines, we are banning a handful of communities that exist solely to annoy other redditors, prevent us from improving Reddit, and generally make Reddit worse for everyone else.

Will there be a clear list of banned subreddits?

[–]zerconic 63ポイント64ポイント  (4子コメント)

A community will be Quarantined on Reddit when we deem its content to be extremely offensive or upsetting to the average redditor or to ourselves.

Does this also mean that reddit is endorsing any subreddits they choose not to quarantine or ban, since they are now individually censoring subreddits?

[–]kochevnikov 29ポイント30ポイント  (2子コメント)

Any plans to deal with moderator abuse in some of the larger subs like /r/news or /r/politics ? Certain mods will delete comments and hand out bans for advancing political opinions or posting stories they disagree with. For example /r/news is notorious for censoring stories related to the TPP.

Also what about plans to deal with mods who mod 20, 50, or even more than 100 subs? Clearly they're simply in it for the power and can't even pretend to be able to actually moderate that many, especially that many large or default subs.

These things make reddit worse as a space, much more than some of the rather spurious claims people are making in the rest of this thread.

[–]thesexygazelle 19ポイント20ポイント  (0子コメント)

With the new push for transparency I would expect that the list of banned subreddits would be published. I feel like there is a lot of talk about transparency and community involvement but not a lot of actual transparency and the community involvement seems more for posterity's sake.

[–]Iron_Booger_59 30ポイント31ポイント  (1子コメント)

Your content policy is so vague as to be meaningless. "make Reddit worse for everyone else." How? Is that its "sole purpose"? Who gets to decide? What is the reasoning process?

It's time to go, after just all this shit. I never know if what I'm reading is what the community as its own entity has produced or if it's been hacked away at by mods, with communities banned, etc. to produce what the higher-ups personally believe is a more perfect website. I don't want my experience here to be shaped by force by others' moral persuasions or financial incentives. Your use of the phrase "everyone else" is extremely troubling. We are ALL "everyone else." All of us who don't get to control what is and isn't up on this website.

Goodbye Reddit. Hello Voat. Deleting this account, and deleting my real account.

[–]Bartisgod 9ポイント10ポイント  (1子コメント)

are /r/undelete and /r/ModerationLog safe? I guess what I'm saying is do not, under any circumstances, let the default sub mods have any input at all into this policy or which subs are banned. /r/worldnews , /r/news , and /r/technology are basically trying to censor all of Reddit, and they must be completely shut out of future policy decisions if Reddit is to remain the place that you and all of us want it to be. It is absolutely not in the cards, under any circumstances, that those 2 would be shut down or quarantined, right?

[–]culman13 108ポイント109ポイント  (7子コメント)

Are you serious /u/spez? Wow. You banned subreddits because they "generally annoy people." This right after you litterally said you would quarantine subreddits rather than ban them because they don't violate set rules. You have gone back on your word and have become a straight up dictator.

Listen I am not a fan of any of those subreddits, but people have a right to say what they want to say so long it is not hurting others directly. Those subreddits did not harass people and kept to themselves.

This site is such a disappointing pile of dog shit. Every day the right to say something someone else might not like crumbles away a little more than the day previous. What happened to your words /u/spez when you said you can't win an arguement by silencing the opposition?

[–]Lumpyguy 80ポイント81ポイント  (9子コメント)

Ban SRS already.

Why haven't you banned SRS yet? They are the WORST offenders of breaking the rules you have set up, but you refuse to ban that subreddit.

Why? Why do you continue to let SRS harrass people? Why do you continue to let SRS doxx people? Why do you continue to let SRS vote brigade? What makes SRS any different from Coontown? Or fatpeoplehate? Or Watchniggersdie?

Is it a racial thing? Are you only banning racists? Do you not give a shit about anything else? What is going on?

You keep on talking about being open with what you're doing, but you don't tell us anything about what we want to know.

What is even the point? Why are you even talking right now? Just letting us simmer in the absent silence is basically the same as what you're having us do right now.

"I believe this policies strike the right balance." Also, some people are exempt from them. Apparently.

[–]james52312 21ポイント22ポイント  (1子コメント)

So many subreddits now have to be banned because of the new policy..

I wonder, if all of them will actually be banned or if the admins are just nitpicking what they want to get rid of..

[–]Corbee 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

we are banning a handful of communities that exist solely to annoy other redditors, prevent us from improving Reddit, and generally make Reddit worse for everyone else

This seems like a vague, catch all rule that you can use to ban subreddits willy nilly. Who decides what is making reddit worse for everyone else? Why not quarantine the communities instead of banning them, because then they will be closed off among themselves and will have no way of flouting those rules? It seems like this rule is there to be applied anytime there is mounting political pressure on the company. Any subreddit that is creating bad PR, really. This is reddit's safety valve, not a principle.

[–]LadyKa 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

Where is the proposed transparency? I was not a supporter of coontown, but I would like to know what policy rules they violated along with concrete examples shown to justify outright banning rather than quarantining.

To my knowledge it was a subreddit where like-minded individuals could discuss an issue they felt strongly on. It certainly never showed up in my feed. If I wanted to participate I would have had to look this subreddit up, which is how most special interest subreddits work. You have to look for them. Sure, the majority of people are not interested, but you can't remove a discussion group because people who have never looked for it might be offended.

If the group discussed scenarios and issues amongst themselves without forcing their ideas on others or endangering anyone, then this group should be allowed, no matter how distasteful you find it.

If it violated these principles, I want to be able to see that. Tell me why, explicitly. Transparency. Yeah, it's a lot of work, but it's important. Give me examples on each and every banned subreddit, so that I can better follow the rules.

[–]Akudra 8ポイント9ポイント  (0子コメント)

Our policies are not changing dramatically from what we have had in the past.

The update to the policy:

we are banning a handful of communities that exist solely to annoy other redditors, prevent us from improving Reddit, and generally make Reddit worse for everyone else.

Seems like a pretty dramatic change to me as it is effectively a "whatever sticks" clause to justify banning any sub you find undesirable.

When are you going to update the values page to erase all this free speech business that you seem to no longer care about?

[–]Lynch_King 28ポイント29ポイント  (0子コメント)

Can you own up to the fact that the subs you banned were not banned for breaking any of the new policy's rules (in fact, the rules you updated in this new policy have been on the rules of subs like coontown for a while, to avoid getting banned) but because you believed they showed the negative side of reddit?

Clearly this is true because, as hundreds have already pointed out, subreddits that encourage brigading (like SRS) are still here. And they actually broke the rules. At least then people will realize you used your own morals to ban subs you didn't agree with, which is pretty dumb on a website as huge as reddit.

[–]GreyWalker 53ポイント54ポイント  (14子コメント)

A community will be Quarantined on Reddit when we deem its content to be extremely offensive or upsetting to the average redditor or to ourselves. The purpose of quarantining a community is to prevent its content from being accidentally viewed by those who do not wish to do so. Restrictions on a quarantined community include:

  • Requiring an account with a verified email address
  • Requiring an explicit opt-in
  • No custom images
  • Will generate no revenue, including ads or Reddit Gold

[–]DonkiestOfKongs 9ポイント10ポイント  (2子コメント)

From an information security standpoint: How will you be storing the data about what quarantined subreddits I've opted into? In the event of a security breach, how easily could this information be associated with my 'verified email'?

[–]ibnwarraq 12ポイント13ポイント  (3子コメント)

Ok. WTF.

So atheists living in Muslim countries write in /r/atheism and /r/exmuslim/ about being beaten, punished, persecuted because of their views. The subs are their source of support, help against the harassment they recieve.

On the other hand, I've seen Muslims actually cry tears (for them its beyond hate, harassment, triggering, etc) when their God or Prophet is criticized, on /r/atheism.

WHY ARE YOU ALLOWING HARASSMENT ON YOUR SITE? Which of these subs are you going to ban? /r/atheism or /r/islam?

Do you not see the problem? Do you not see the case for free speech? Free Speech RESTS on the understanding that some opinions (Left/Right, Feminist/Antifeminist whatever) WILL hurt someone, somewhere.

You CANNOT decide what is hate or harassment - that is the point of free speech.

[–]edafade 382ポイント383ポイント  (9子コメント)

Subs like /r/coontown are banned (in fact, you banned only coontown related subs) but SRS is still up and running.

While I didn't agree with their ideology or what they represented, you, /u/spez stated yourself on several occasions, you did not support the beliefs of /r/coontown but believed they had a place here on reddit. SRS clearly violates reddit's Content "Policy" yet remains unaffected whereas the former did not and were contained to their own communities.

It's the same shit as before, just packaged with a ribbon.

Very disappointing.

[–]Saint_Judas 23ポイント24ポイント  (4子コメント)

I don't mind censorship on Reddit (after all it is your platform) but it is the hypocrisy that bugs me. Banning ideas, while saying you only ban actions, while certain subreddits actively engage in the actions you say you are preventing but are given free reign. I would be so much happier with these decisions if you just straight up told us that you are banning things the board members don't like.

[–]PmMeYourWhatever 7ポイント8ポイント  (5子コメント)

https://voat.co/v/CoonTown/comments/379542/1583572

Not only that, let's set up the raid posts! now we don't have to worry about /r/coontown getting banned any more, time to start raiding their hugboxes.

This should be fun . . . :(

[–]until0 77ポイント78ポイント  (12子コメント)

Why don't you just ban SRS? Seriously, why do you keep defending them. Half of this thread is saying your word is usless due to your blatant hypocrisy, and they are not wrong...

I don't understand why you don't just follow suit, they clearly break the rules you've just laid out, but yet, you'd rather annoy your users and provide shelter for a bastion of hate, then do what is not only expected, but morally correct.

[–]dragonfangxl 33ポイント34ポイント  (4子コメント)

Today, in addition to applying Quarantines, we are banning a handful of communities that exist solely to annoy other redditors, prevent us from improving Reddit, and generally make Reddit worse for everyone else.

I dont understand. Why bother making this new tool (quarantines) if you're still going to ban subreddits? Do you not trust the effectiveness of this tool? Also is there a list of the subreddits being banned?

[–]Demolishing 112ポイント113ポイント  (39子コメント)

Is involuntary pornography

How will this affect stuff like /r/amateur and /r/realgirls and /r/SluttyHalloween ?

[–]Sualtaim 11ポイント12ポイント  (2子コメント)

Our policies are not changing dramatically from what we have had in the past. One new concept is Quarantining a community, which entails applying a set of restrictions to a community so its content will only be viewable to those who explicitly opt in. We will Quarantine communities whose content would be considered extremely offensive to the average redditor.

Can you provide a list of Quarantined subreddits?

[–]Artalay 39ポイント40ポイント  (4子コメント)

Out of curiosity what constitutes the "average redditor"? And if you don't have a working definition of that, what steps will you be taking towards coming up with it?

[–]7-sidedDice 18ポイント19ポイント  (0子コメント)

Great marketing move. Too bad people aren't as thick as you think they are and can't be just fooled by repeating the phrase "we are banning a handful of communities that exist solely to annoy other redditors, prevent us from improving Reddit, and generally make Reddit worse for everyone else" ad infinitum.

[–]GamersCorp 44ポイント45ポイント  (10子コメント)

Can you give us any examples of specific subreddits that will be quarantined?

[–]geekgreg 18ポイント19ポイント  (2子コメント)

The content guidelines refer to a harassment policy which uses the words "bully" and then "demean" as a part of harassment.

Could we get some clarification on those terms?

[–]tracker2208 38ポイント39ポイント  (0子コメント)

We didn't ban them because we disagree with them. We banned them because this exist solely to annoy other redditors, prevent us from improving Reddit, and generally make Reddit worse for everyone else.

HAHAHAHHAHAHAAHHAHHHAHAHA.

[–]Aylesbury 9ポイント10ポイント  (0子コメント)

nor do we tolerate communities dedicated to fostering harassing behavior.

That harassing individuals around here isn't okay should be pretty clear, especially since Reddit still doesn't have a block function (a function that you'd usually take for granted), but the way it's phrased it just sounds like an excuse to close down subs that are a bit uncomfortable in your opinion, by claiming that they are "fostering harassing behavior". There are many people who are a bit "misguided" but I'd rather they'd keep circle jerking in their subs, rather than spread it everywhere, as it has happened in the past.

Speaking of the devil:

Today we removed [...] a handful of other communities that violate the spirit of the policy by making Reddit worse for everyone else: /r/CoonTown, /r/WatchNiggersDie, /r/bestofcoontown, /r/koontown, /r/CoonTownMods, /r/CoonTownMeta.

You can not get rid of people's negative feelings and opinions, at least not by trying to "ban" them. You accomplish nothing. I wonder what you'll ban next. Maybe something that isn't flat out hateful, but simply disagreeable?

[–]thegoodstudyguide 23ポイント24ポイント  (0子コメント)

I hate to defend it in any form but according to the spirit of this new policy update /r/coontown should have been quarantined and subs like SRS should have been banned, seeing as SRS targets specific redditors where as coontown is just a general racism forum.

[–]man_and_machine 9ポイント10ポイント  (5子コメント)

What is accomplished by making "quarantined" communities only available to users with a registered email address?

[–]GoldenIvan 8ポイント9ポイント  (0子コメント)

We will Quarantine communities whose content would be considered extremely offensive to the average redditor.

That's just hilarious.

[–]SteelSaxon 107ポイント108ポイント  (4子コメント)

No supporter of Coontown but this is ridiculous

Arbitrary definitions of what gets banned and what doesn't, what makes Reddit worse and what doesn't. It won't work and in the long run you'll fight a never ending war to please everyone and end up pleasing nobody. How SRS didn't make the cut for a ban since it interferes in every Sub when Coontown was relatively contained is case in point.

[–]Richard_Nixon__ 62ポイント63ポイント  (4子コメント)

we are banning a handful of communities that exist solely to annoy other redditors

That is literally SRS, and it's a sub you refuse to even consider banning.