use the following search parameters to narrow your results:
e.g. subreddit:aww site:imgur.com dog
subreddit:aww site:imgur.com dog
詳しくは検索FAQを参照
高度な検索: 投稿者や、subredditで……
6,650 人のユーザーが現在閲覧しています
Official announcements from the reddit admins.
See also:
Content Policy Update (self.announcements)
spez[A] が 5時間前 * 投稿
残りのコメントをみる →
[–]Number357 2978ポイント2979ポイント2980ポイント 5時間前*x5 (1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.
[–]GoTuckYourbelt -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント 5時間前 (0子コメント)
They are childish, and they bring social justice causes to a childish level of argumentation, not hateful or bigoted. If this is your basis for removing them, it's not going to happen. Now, make it about sensationalism and eliciting outrage, make it about subreddits that brigade other subreddits and users, and .. well, probably not going to get far. Everyone will complain about how the other is doing this and how this complaint is really only brought about when it's used against them and how anything sensationalist or flippantly outrageous is part of their identity, regardless of which banner they prefer to wave above their heads, and it'll just be the game of thrones it already is.
π Rendered by PID 13620 on app-03 at 2015-08-06 02:15:20.552097+00:00 running f8183c9 country code: JP.
残りのコメントをみる →
[–]Number357 2978ポイント2979ポイント2980ポイント x5 (1子コメント)
[–]GoTuckYourbelt -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント (0子コメント)