上位 200 件のコメント表示する 500

[–]Cheech5 2456ポイント2457ポイント  (4815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] 3037ポイント3038ポイント x10 (4703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 1962ポイント1963ポイント  (344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] 498ポイント499ポイント  (306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 409ポイント410ポイント  (144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.

[–]Warlizard 3197ポイント3198ポイント x8 (595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.

EDIT: And this comment was already linked in SRS:

https://www.reddit.com/r/ShitRedditSays/comments/3fx49i/meta_spezs_new_content_policy_unveiled_ctown_and/ctsvdrb?context=3

mfw /u/WarLizard[1] pulls the "WHAT ABOUT SRS" card after being linked here. He regularly contributes to /r/KotakuInAction[2] , not sure why he feels like he'd be welcome here at all. He's also complaining about the existence of SRS, so yeah right there he'd be banned. Oh no, a sexist/racist/homophobic/transphobic post was made and got linked here. WOULD ANYONE THINK OF THE RACIST'S FEELINGS?

This is a perfect example.

I have posted in KiA, and it has been fascinating to talk with the people there. Much like it has been fascinating to talk to the people in GamerGhazi.

But without context, someone might assume that because I've posted or commented there that I'm racist, misogynistic, transphobic, or maybe just an asshole. And suggesting that I think I'd be welcome in SRS, outside of responding to people talking about me there is ridiculous.

So with this extra data in mind, should I feel comfortable and safe posting in controversial subreddits? Or should I stay in the safe ones, stick my head in the sand, my fingers in my ears, and never discuss anything outside of cat pics?

EDIT: I continue to feel safe to express my opinion: http://imgur.com/p3klfon

[–]AMarmot 538ポイント539ポイント  (137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 2862ポイント2863ポイント x5 (1031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 1004ポイント1005ポイント  (294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 hate subs that seem to have dodged the ban bullet, some even enjoying an ad-free reddit. (NSFW Warning, and reply to this comment if you want something added or removed from the list.)

/u/chicagofirefifa3 adds this;

Quarantined: apes and antipozi, Ferguson, kiketown, US black culture, chimpingainteasy,

Set to private by mods: philosophyofrape,

Nothing: White rights, nazi, goyim, gasthesnoo, chimpout, greatabos, hatepire, horsey, goebola, feministhate, chicongo, bengarrison, polaks, reichpost, blackpeoplehate, modeveryonereborn

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.

Edit3; https://i.imgur.com/oVHlcX0.png

[–]snorlz 469ポイント470ポイント  (116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?

[–]ANharper 266ポイント267ポイント  (36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 382ポイント383ポイント  (126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?

[–]jabberwockxeno 535ポイント536ポイント  (207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.

[–]TosieRose 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

Why were the "animated CP" (I'm assuming loli?) subs banned? In my opinion that's an awful idea. There was a post recently about a young man who was mostly attracted to prepubescent boys-- and felt fucking awful. He was considering suicide.

There are people out there who have urges and desires they can't control, but who would never even consider acting on such desires and hurting children. Loli and other drawn CP are, from what I understand, an outlet for those people. Banning such subreddits (which by the way I didn't even know existed until now, suggesting they weren't really making reddit any worse) is just going to make pedophiles more likely to harm themselves and others.

Everyone is, understandably, talking about coontown and SRS, but I think this is being wrongly ignored. /u/spez, I think you should reconsider.

[–]brickmack 129ポイント130ポイント  (19子コメント)

Animated CP is neither illegal nor does it "exist solely to annoy other redditors, prevent us from improving Reddit, and generally make Reddit worse for everyone else". This is purely a publicity move

[–]TheMentalist10 987ポイント988ポイント  (149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

Edit 3: And here's what private subs now look like. Fancy!

[–]spez[S,A] 403ポイント404ポイント  (116子コメント)

They receive a message, yes.

[–]booklover13 286ポイント287ポイント  (69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] 85ポイント86ポイント  (52子コメント)

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

[–]dapht 143ポイント144ポイント  (6子コメント)

/u/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.

[–]slyf 1357ポイント1358ポイント  (192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] 1270ポイント1271ポイント  (183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 1643ポイント1644ポイント  (96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 756ポイント757ポイント  (12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 194ポイント195ポイント  (11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!

[–]dwchief 587ポイント588ポイント  (97子コメント)

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

[–]BillW87 742ポイント743ポイント  (87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.

[–]ChangloriousBastard 459ポイント460ポイント  (192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] 186ポイント187ポイント  (188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 569ポイント570ポイント  (153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.

[–]zachlac 133ポイント134ポイント  (37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] 37ポイント38ポイント  (36子コメント)

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

[–]Xet 329ポイント330ポイント  (180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] -282ポイント-281ポイント  (169子コメント)

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

[–]Xet 285ポイント286ポイント  (128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] -273ポイント-272ポイント  (119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.

[–]Xet 268ポイント269ポイント  (36子コメント)

So posting pictures of horrible wounds, people dying, hurting themselves, hurting others etc doesn't fit into the 'heinous content' category, and instead fits into the 'amazing stuff reddit does for the world' category? Or... Somewhere inbetween? If your focus is on making reddit a place where only the positive shines through, well, then it seems you want to deny an accurate representation of what the world is really like.. But, how can this assertion that you want reddit to be known for the 'amazing stuff' fit in with being okay hosting a haven for millions of people who like to look at videos of people dying and getting hurt?

You could at least be honest and say that a subreddit like /r/wtf with its 4.5m subscribers is too large a subreddit revenue-wise for you to quarantine..

Instead, well, we get two contradictory statements. You say on one had that decent nsfw tagging makes it okay for disturbing content to be posted, but then for far smaller subs that barely anyone participates in, this rule somehow isn't enough?

I would love to be able to understand just how it is that you see the world... Because I just don't get it.

[–]SoFFacet 55ポイント56ポイント  (3子コメント)

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.

I really do hate to be that guy, but what you are describing is in fact a positive feedback loop.

That is, A produces more of B which in turn produces more of A.

[–]longshot2025 100ポイント101ポイント  (9子コメント)

Really? /r/wtf isn't getting quarantined?

From your original description of what would be quarantined:

the content that violates a common sense of decency

So what about /r/gore and /r/watchpeopledie? I would've expected that kind of thing to be what reddit would want to keep out of the average user's view.

[–]fried_fetus 216ポイント217ポイント  (9子コメント)

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

[–]raldi 446ポイント447ポイント  (564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] 28ポイント29ポイント  (445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 321ポイント322ポイント  (313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] -322ポイント-321ポイント  (289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 589ポイント590ポイント  (164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] -434ポイント-433ポイント  (158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.

[–]TheoryOfSomething 28ポイント29ポイント  (1子コメント)

I'd suggest putting something significantly more specific than that in the 'Unwelcome Content' section. Say specifically that content which causes reddit admins/staff to spend a disproportionate amount of time removing/modifying/responding to it will be removed. I don't know how many resources you spent dealing with CoonTown but consider quantifying what level of bullshit you're willing to put up with as much as possible.

Our exchange illustrates exactly why the core value you quoted is too vague to be called a content policy. I didn't even know it was an actionable part of the policy until you told me. Usually introductory paragraphs and preambles are just that, introductory. The real meat of the policy is spelled out in detail below.

[–]probably_quite_drunk 524ポイント525ポイント  (45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.

[–]cptnpiccard 103ポイント104ポイント  (12子コメント)

"enjoy Reddit for what it is"

Exactly WHAT it is then? You had those guys isolated in a corner, nobody needs to go there if they don't want, and as crazy as they are (and many other racist/homophobic subs are), I never got any interruption or distress in my browsing experience due to them. Pretty much what you're saying is: "whatever, play nice, or we'll cut you off if you bother us too much" in terms of manpower.

[–]babeltoothe 154ポイント155ポイント  (50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 91ポイント92ポイント  (3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.

[–]babeltoothe 82ポイント83ポイント  (7子コメント)

All this seems completely arbitrary. Subreddits that don't meet the criteria are banned because they "waste your time", and subreddits that do like SRS don't because... brigading can be "handled by technology"? But your policy mentions harassing as a bannable offence...

It just doesn't make sense man. It seems more like you guys made this as vague as possible so you could carpet bomb whatever subreddits you guys don't like and then hide behind intentional ambiguity in the rules.

Way to mess it up :/

[–]jonivy 28ポイント29ポイント  (2子コメント)

If we want to improve Reddit, we need more people, but CT's existence and popularity has also made recruiting here more difficult.

Maybe you guys need a CEO or something... oh wait, that's you! You actually think that you're having problems recruiting because of the existence of some content on reddit? Are you serious?

Did you come to that conclusion on your own, or did somebody tell you that?

It seems like whoever said that to you probably doesn't know what they're talking about, and you should seriously consider not trusting them to have good information for you.

If you seem to be having problems recruiting, then you should consider firing your recruitment manager. He/she is probably the problem.

[–]SteelSaxon 53ポイント54ポイント  (9子コメント)

So be honest and tell us the real reason, don't hide behind a content-policy you've made as vague as possible so you could make arbitrary judgements without justifying yourselves.

Just say it: Was Coontown banned because some people were kicking up a fuss about it?

[–]JamisonP 59ポイント60ポイント  (4子コメント)

Yeah, because SRS spends a disproportionate amount of time bitching about them and tweeting their shit at Gawker who then writes articles about how racist reddit is.

What you're actually saying is you spend a disproportionate time dealing with SJWs who complain loudly about content they find problematic. Cure the disease, not the symptom. Humans are flawed, there will always be assholes who find the dark underbelly to spew their filth.

and don't recruit people who have a problem with questionable content existing, recruit people who are able to build tools to allow some people to protect themselves and some people to express their shitty shitty views without bothering anyone else.

[–]fried_fetus 148ポイント149ポイント  (13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.

[–]Shintao6 375ポイント376ポイント  (268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] -382ポイント-381ポイント x2 (234子コメント)

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

[–]R706 314ポイント315ポイント  (8子コメント)

Actual footage of having sex with dogs which is also illegal in certain countries AKA /r/sexwithdogs - Fine.

Something you could draw in your room with a pencil and paper AKA lolicon - Not Fine.

Got it.

The reality is more like, any controversial subreddit goes unless it becomes big enough to get the attention of your sponsors etc, then it gets banned.

I know what you're doing since the start. The small drip feed of working through the transition so as not to create too much fallout all at once.

If I was even a remotely controversial subreddit community I'd leave reddit now or at the very least have some contingency plan in place because these "updates" are just going to keep happening for the foreseeable future.

[–]Anonymish 395ポイント396ポイント  (101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!

[–]TurbidusQuaerenti 46ポイント47ポイント  (3子コメント)

So much for "banning behavior, not ideas". It's clearly become "banning anything we or our advertisers find offensive." Nobody wants to be the guy defending lolicon, but the blatant hypocrisy is astounding.

And as others have said, does this mean erotica and anime/manga related subs are next? They have fictional underage content somewhat often. This is definitely not a good direction Reddit is heading in.

[–]Shintao6 12ポイント13ポイント  (0子コメント)

Eh, I don't agree with your reasoning, but I'm not the boss here. I would have appreciated a little more heads up, this was never touched on that I could see during the Q/A a couple of weeks ago. Also, could have been listed more prominently in the Content Policy instead of being a side note tacked onto the 3rd sentence of a bullet point that wouldn't seem to apply to drawn images. But hey...now I know...

[–]illegal_deagle 1595ポイント1596ポイント  (689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] -649ポイント-648ポイント  (577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 587ポイント588ポイント  (381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] -486ポイント-485ポイント  (356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 719ポイント720ポイント  (149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.

[–]missmymom 516ポイント517ポイント  (130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

[–]AthkAboutMyPenith 39ポイント40ポイント  (1子コメント)

It's becoming quite entertaining to watch you tapdance around all of these questions. Jesus Christ /u/spez do you think we're a bunch of 5 year olds?

Your reasons for banning those other subs are the modus operandi of subs like SRS.

[–]Didalectic 317ポイント318ポイント  (10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 criterion? 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 154ポイント155ポイント  (4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?

[–]mn920 268ポイント269ポイント  (15子コメント)

Holy crap that content policy is vague.

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

So, a quarantine happens when you believe that at least 50.1% of reddit users would be extremely offended or upset by a community? Seeing as how we're a pretty liberal, secular crowd, I'd like you to please quarantine subreddits relating to religion and conservative politics. I, and arguably 50.1% of reddit, find them upsetting.

Photographs, videos, or digital images of you in a state of nudity or engaged in any act of sexual conduct, taken without your permission.

So, "revenge porn" and /r/TheFappening is OK, since the photos were taken with permission and only later used without permission?

Do not post content that incites harm against people or groups of people.

What the hell is "harm"? Only physical injury and illegal acts, or does it also cover any negative impact, such as loss of income or emotional distress? Further, when does somebody incite harm? If I make a post in good-faith that tends to increase the likelihood a person or group will be harmed, have I violated this policy?

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, or fear for their safety or the safety of those around them.

Like "harm," this policy abuses the word "safety." What does it mean? Only physical safety, or the safety of my ideas a la safe-spaces?

As if that isn't enough, you've apparently created an exception to the content policy within its first hour:

... 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.

Ridiculously, this standard for banning is easier to meet than the standard for quarantining. And it gets even worse when your later comments implicitly change the "and" to an "or." Reddit's content policy now seems to ban any content or communities that "generally make Reddit worse." You can't get more vague than that.

I also take serious issue with how quarantines are implemented. It's a generally good idea to keep certain, well-defined categories of content isolated. But requiring login and e-mail confirmation isn't so much quarantining as it is imposing arbitrary standards to make it harder for the communities to exist. Why not also start limiting their comments to 200 characters just for kicks? You could achieve a quarantine using much more narrowly tailored means--just require a NSFW-like confirmation per subreddit, exclude them from /r/all, and block search engines from indexing.

In short, I'm extremely disappointed. Not so much because of the policy itself but because of how you've misled the community into thinking that Reddit was truly interested in community feedback and in creating clear standards. You've created a content policy with a bunch of words, but an overriding exception that boils down to "if we don't like it."

[–]musicandwords 698ポイント699ポイント  (110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 367ポイント368ポイント  (435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] -768ポイント-767ポイント  (386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 266ポイント267ポイント  (25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 579ポイント580ポイント  (15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 721ポイント722ポイント  (177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 65ポイント66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 107ポイント108ポイント  (13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 175ポイント176ポイント  (4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 200ポイント201ポイント  (4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.

[–]WhiteFlight2 503ポイント504ポイント  (444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] -652ポイント-651ポイント  (408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

[–]WhiteFlight2 164ポイント165ポイント  (6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.

[–]senatorskeletor 826ポイント827ポイント  (68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 340ポイント341ポイント  (104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?

[–]Jealousy123 148ポイント149ポイント  (20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.

[–]TheSpekio 376ポイント377ポイント  (6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.

[–]Naked_Bacon_Tuesday 384ポイント385ポイント  (5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 280ポイント281ポイント  (15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?

[–]gigabyte898 17ポイント18ポイント  (1子コメント)

I'm going to play devil's advocate for the loli subs that were banned. For those who don't know, loli is a sexual drawing of a minor which is completely legal in the US, where the reddit HQ is located. I personally don't view them, but don't see too much of a problem with them existing either. I understand it may have offended some people, but if so why not add a quarantine label? Looking though your content rules it says actual CP is banned, but not drawing. The reason these drawings are okay is the people depicted have no age. You can draw a picture of a minor, but say they're 18, and that's where the legal grey area comes up. To put it simply, IT'S FICTION.

Regarding you saying this will encourage sexual predator, I think the opposite. Would you rather have them look at real CP, or fictional characters. You'd want the latter, of course. It provides an outlet for people who are attracted to underaged people to "express" their views without causing real harm. If this was actual CP you could say viewing it is harmful because it creates more demand, and you'd be absolutely right, but demand for a fictional character with NO DEFINED AGE isn't hurting anyone.

Just my 2 cents on the matter

[–]kochevnikov 161ポイント162ポイント  (11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.

[–]LadyKa 46ポイント47ポイント  (3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.

[–]LukeTheFisher 232ポイント233ポイント  (52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.

[–]psuedopseudo 49ポイント50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.

[–]Corbee 39ポイント40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.

[–]VulGerrity 7ポイント8ポイント  (1子コメント)

I'm pretty sure /r/circlejerk exists solely to annoy other redditors...c'mon man...that's a really terrible and vague rule.

Don't we have a right to "annoy" other people? There's nothing wrong with annoying someone. In fact, being annoyed is the fault of the one being annoyed. I'm annoyed by people chewing with their mouths open, and it's generally unacceptable in the US, but in some countries it's perfectly acceptable, and is encouraged to show respect for the cook.

You know what the best way to deal with "annoying" things/people is? Just ignore them. If it's not harmful physically or psychologically then what's the harm? If it's merely "annoying" just stay away from it. And what's the worst you feel from being annoyed? "Ugh...I'm just really bothered by that...I'm not offended or upset...just bothered, oy, that just really gets under my skin..." Right winged nuts annoy me, can we ban their sub-reddits? I can't stand /r/guns or /r/trees can we ban them too? All of their posts feel like they were made solely to annoy me. Of course you can't do that! So you know what I did? I have RES installed and I've hidden them from showing up on r/all. That's it. Super simple. If it's not actually harmful, the users should have the choice as to whether or not they see or engage with content they find distasteful.

Banning something by proclaiming that it exists solely to annoy others is like claiming that you're banning NSFW subreddits that exist solely for inciting sinful sexual thoughts and behavior. Sexual thoughts and behavior are basically not harmful, and if you don't want to see it, you don't have to.

Maybe instead of banning these types of subreddits, they should just get flagged NSFW, let the NSFW filter catch it. Or create a new filter.

[–]Olive_Jane 184ポイント185ポイント  (28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?

[–]tollie 12ポイント13ポイント  (1子コメント)

I think you should be quick to Quarantine (and un-quarantine, when appropriate), slow to Ban.

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

That language seems really broad and I'm concerned that it leaves the process a bit too opaque.

Insert obligatory, "While I personally disagree with and find offensive," etc. etc.

I don't know exactly what the solution is, but for the good of reddit, "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it."

I feel like the community should be involved more (perhaps through email-registered, or IP limited voting?), and the process should be more open.

[–]Mobre 230ポイント231ポイント  (14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.

[–]Facerless 157ポイント158ポイント  (8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 305ポイント306ポイント  (140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 132ポイント133ポイント  (11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?

[–]Vittles_And_Libation 98ポイント99ポイント  (9子コメント)

"While my personal views towards bigotry haven't changed, my opinion of what Reddit should do about it has. I don't think we should silence people just because their viewpoints are something we disagree with. " -/u/spez , about seven days ago.

Permalink:

https://www.reddit.com/r/announcements/comments/3f10up/good_morning_i_thought_id_give_a_quick_update/ctka48v

[–]Iron_Booger_59 80ポイント81ポイント  (4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.

[–]The_Adventurist 81ポイント82ポイント  (7子コメント)

Christ this is so stupid.

You realize that by taking control of what can and cannot be posted on the site based on moral grounds, you thereby imply approval of everything that ISN'T removed, right?

So because /r/coontown was removed but /r/kiketown wasn't, you are now taking a stand that /r/kiketown is Reddit™ approved.

A year ago none of these subreddits were in my life and now they ALL ARE because of this stupid fucking idea to police them.

They were already contained and quarantined. Now they are not. Now it's spread everywhere and now I'm even sympathetic to their rage at these utterly awful content policy changes.

So dumb.

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

Until SRD and SRS is banned every one of these post is just bullshit PR used a justification for banning content the Admins don't like.

And im sure banning these subs has absolutely NOTHING to do with this huffington post blog that came out yesterday about contacting Reddits advertisers because of racist content.

But your right its all about the subs actions and not the content.

It so fucking obvious to everyone here that Admins are banning things they dont like, and thats it. If they were actually following the PR bullshit they keep telling us, then SRS and SRD would be gone. I mean for fuck sake these people have a fucking custom CSS script that shows where people post and if its some where they dont like you get down voted because of it.

Stop trying to bullshit the people who made this place what it is.

[–]culman13 227ポイント228ポイント  (16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 212ポイント213ポイント  (42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.

[–]Saint_Judas 54ポイント55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.

[–]thesexygazelle 37ポイント38ポイント  (1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.

[–]drebin8 15ポイント16ポイント  (0子コメント)

Can you add a permanent opt-in? I'm not really offended by anything, so it seems silly to warn me about things that other people may find offensive. Just add a setting or something to ignore the quarantine...

[–]james52312 48ポイント49ポイント  (5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..

[–]DonkiestOfKongs 39ポイント40ポイント  (3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'?

[–]PmMeYourWhatever 31ポイント32ポイント  (7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 . . . :(

[–]ibnwarraq 85ポイント86ポイント  (7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.

[–]Lynch_King 46ポイント47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 67ポイント68ポイント  (33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

[–]Mindless_Consumer 15ポイント16ポイント  (0子コメント)

Opting into 'offensive' subs. Do we opt into each 'offensive' sub? Or is there a "opt into offensive subs" button? Like a NSFW filter, only for 'offensive' material.

[–]bookerevan 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

Please consider also banning /r/politics, IMO the most hateful subreddit. Any attempt to engage in civilized debate is met immediately with hate and vitriol, worse than /r/coontown IMO. There are also many other subreddits that are hateful so I'm hopeful you shut all of them down given they don't comply with the new Reddit rules. Corporations won't be happy with any debate or disagreement with their ideology, so shut all and everything down, users have to adjust to Reddit needs as they aren't as important as the owners vs. the customers/users. I'm sure this is a ticket for Reddit success.

[–]NobodySpecial999 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

Here's your problem. You want an open forum available for all except those things that people complain loudly enough about.
I don't condone, nor participate in CT, but I always appreciated the fact that it had the ability to exist here. It meant that no matter how often I get berated or attacked for my own views on politics or religion, I will always have a place to express those opinions.
No matter how many SJW's spam and troll my Conservative posts, I will still be able to be heard by someone.
I always appreciated Reddit for this reason. The existence of CT and the others, no matter your view of them, demonstrated Reddits openness.
So now what am I to think? That even Reddit, the last bastion of free and open communication in the fucking world has succumbed to the SJW's and their hated POLITICALLY CORRECT MINDFUCK???
I'm not a reddit pro. I'm just an average user who reads average posts and makes average statements on average subs.
But I come here to get the hell away from the constant barrage of PC shit in typical social media. So, that's no more? You've joined the FB and G+ ranks? Just another Social Media site?
I am not a sheep. I do not give a flying fuck about Cecil the lion and I think Bruce Jenner is an idiot.
I think the left is mentally unstable and I think illegal Mexicans will be the end of this country. These are ideas which are often controversial... and in the current world, frequently attacked without thought, considered NON-ACCEPTABLE!
Now it seems that those powers who wish to promote their ideas of political correctness have conquered one more place. Reddit has given in to their shit and caved.
Good work, Reddit.

[–]somebodylies 6ポイント7ポイント  (1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.

Yeah you fucking sellout cocksucker.

r/Shitredditsays, their troll communities aimed at harassing and doxxing users, /r/Subredditdrama constantly harassing and brigading smaller subs, and tons and tons of radfem communities which are meant JUST TO ANNOY AND HARASS other users.

Only difference, your tongue's up their butt.

Stop fucking sugar coating your words you self-righteous asshole.

[–]Demolishing 168ポイント169ポイント  (47子コメント)

Is involuntary pornography

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

[–]Bartisgod 25ポイント26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?

[–]Sualtaim 18ポイント19ポイント  (3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?

[–]thegoodstudyguide 55ポイント56ポイント  (3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.

[–]hannar 42ポイント43ポイント  (5子コメント)

To be honest, this is the first I've ever heard of /r/CoonTown or anything related to it. I'm subscribed to subreddits that I am personally interested in, I'm unsubscribed from those that annoy me, and anything with hurtful content has never crossed my radar. I don't go out of my way to find people to be angry with.

[–]mcpuck 15ポイント16ポイント  (1子コメント)

Now I'm really starting to worry that the reddit I love will die. The subs you've banned I'm sure are terrible, but the amazing thing about reddit has always been the support of free speech.

I don't believe that you should ban ANY content that's legal. Only behaviors (like brigading and doxxing).

The two items that really bother me:

  1. Selective banning of embarrassing subs, which leads many to believe (and I'm starting to think this) that the admins are favoring certain ideologies.

  2. Requiring an email only for those subs deemed questionable? WTF?

I was really hoping all this would blow over and we'd be left with the old reddit, but it seems clear now that the site is headed towards sanitized pablum, or worse.

[–]edafade 521ポイント522ポイント  (25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.