1722
1723

Content Policy Update (self.announcements)

spez[A] が 投稿

並べ替え:
Q&A (提案されたアイデア)
ベストトップ新着論争中古い順
あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]Number357 2986ポイント2987ポイント x5 (1228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.

[–]chicagofirefifa3 18ポイント19ポイント  (2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.

except that's more likely to trigger a userbase revolt.

[–]BeyondSelfish 4ポイント5ポイント  (1子コメント)

And you think acting dishonestly and not enforcing their own rules wont?

[–]chicagofirefifa3 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

i think the administrators think that this is a better approach. I do not claim to understand the internet masses or the motive force of

that being said yes, i think this works better than a very blunt literal "we're banning them because we hate their ideology and it hurts our business" but is there another way to say essentially the same thing that's better than what they did today? probably but i don't know what it is.

[–]max225 92ポイント93ポイント  (13子コメント)

I never saw /r/coontown brigade or anything... Didn't /u/spez say he wasn't going to ban people for hateful views as long as they stayed put? Then you've got fuckin SRS which is full of vitriol and brigades and they don't go anywhere.

[–]peenoid 87ポイント88ポイント  (5子コメント)

It's all optics. Reddit is cleaning up its image in order to become profitable, to attract advertisers and investors. Spez will tell you it's about facilitating "authentic conversations," but such a notion is laughable.

Racist subreddits, especially popular ones like CoonTown, have to go because they scare people away. Don't for a moment believe it's because they "make Reddit a worse place" or "incite harassment." How do we know that's bullshit? Because there are about a million other subreddits that, by some metric or another, make Reddit a "worse" place or can be construed as "inciting harassment." But they don't go. Why? Optics. They don't make Reddit look bad.

SRS doesn't make Reddit look bad to investors or advertisers. None of the people who matter see a bunch of manic feminists with fucked-up priorities making fun of hapless guys' awkward comments as a problem. It doesn't even cross their radar. Brigading? Ha! They won't know what the hell you're talking about. Show them CoonTown, though, and they are running in the opposite direction.

Don't buy Reddit's justifications and content policies as meaning anything. It's all about money. Which is fine, honestly. I just wish they'd be honest about it instead of insulting our intelligence with this bullshit about making Reddit "safe for everyone." Fuck you and your lies.

[–]komali_2 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

They are trying to pull customers from their main competitor, Tumblr.

[–]ElegantBiscuit 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Also, by banning those subreddits, those people that reddit (and their advertisers) do not approve of will either leave or just end up in the general population of other subreddits which makes other subreddits toxic at times. If they get banned from that sub then they might just end up leaving reddit altogether.

コメントをもっと表示する (3 返事)

    [–]AliceHouse 3ポイント4ポイント  (3子コメント)

    Literally half the shit they do is brigade. Are you saying just because you yourself personally don't see something then it doesn't exist? Are you saying your ignorance is a valid measurement?

    [–]max225 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

    I spend a lot of time on reddit... Some might say too much time. CT was a big community. I probably would've seen it if it was a big problem. That being said, I might be wrong but we can make the same case for other banned subs like the loli ones. It's wrong, but it isn't illegal, nor does it violate reddits new CoC but it's banned. SRS violates just about every facet of the new policy. You don't have to be such a fuck. Try making a cohesive argument.

    コメントをもっと表示する (3 返事)

      [–]Compliant_Automaton 162ポイント163ポイント x3 (489子コメント)

      Calling SRS hate speech always reminds me of a neo-nazi complaining about the Southern Poverty Law Center. Someone calling out a hateful group for their bullshit is not the same thing as being hateful themselves.

      EDIT: Since the guy above me has decided to post a wall of text, I think I have carte blanche to do the same.

      First: The distinction between subreddits that could promote real life harm to innocent third parties and those subreddits that simply anger other Redditors. Some websites either have users that are predisposed to violence against minorities or, perhaps, spur otherwise non-violent individuals to violence.

      Consider Stormfront, which is a proud example of this. Obviously, it's impossible to say which of these two possibilities are true, but it is impossible to rule out the possibility that some websites can incite some users to real life violence.

      Hate speech against minorities runs a long track record of this problem, wherein a group mentality can be provoked to acts which lone individuals are less likely to perpetrate absent perceived support from others of the same belief. A private corporation such as Reddit has no legal obligation to protect speech of any kind. Hence the appropriate decision to ban such speech, as that Reddit's corporate overlords probably are like most humans in that they'd rather not feel potentially responsible for harm to others than to protect highly hateful speech.

      Second: SRS is designed to provoke the ire of people, but it's not hateful. And the people it irks are just having their own words thrown back at them. It's just trolls trolling trolls, except that people are taking it all very seriously, which is weird.

      As such, if SRS really bothers you, it's probably because of who you are more than who they are. Sorry if you don't like that, but it's just how it is.

      Lastly, the vast majority of replies to this comment are straw-man arguments that distort SRS by claiming that the comments being quoted and linked from other subreddits are in fact the opinions of SRS users instead. This type of argumentation is uncompelling to anyone who actually analyzes what they are doing in that subreddit.

      That's my two cents, and I'm now going back to being a regular redditor and staying out of the drama. If anyone wants to talk about something non-drama related, there are great places throughout Reddit to do so, and I hope to see you there. While I'm at it, thanks /u/spez, it's a small step in the right direction, and I understand that you can't take a bigger one just yet because any large changes are likely to create significant disruption and cause more harm than good. It's appreciated.

      [–]OneBigBug 395ポイント396ポイント  (57子コメント)

      I would agree in principle, except they openly admit to hatefulness in their FAQ.

      Q: Doesn't all the hate towards white, straight men make SRS just as bigoted?

      A: No. We punch up, not down.

      Whether or not you appreciate SRS as some sort of satire, it is hateful. Maybe it's hateful as a joke, but it's still hateful.

      [–]Likes_Information 48ポイント49ポイント  (3子コメント)

      /r/fatpeoplehate was also supposed to be satire too and that was banned first.

      [–]FalmerbloodElixir 64ポイント65ポイント  (4子コメント)

      God, fuck everyone who says "PUNCHING UP IS OKAY, KILL ALL MEN"

      [–]stanhhh 21ポイント22ポイント  (1子コメント)

      A: No. We punch up, not down.

      Ahah get the fuck out with your clown rhetoric . Punching is punching !

      コメントをもっと表示する (46 返事)

        [–]Number357 465ポイント466ポイント  (256子コメント)

        One of the top posts in there now is mocking somebody for saying "men are the disposable gender." They mock the idea of male disposability. Our society views men's lives as less valuable than women's, our society expects men to sacrifice their lives for others, our society does not care when men die. Homicides with a male victim are punished less severely than homicides with a female victims, and this is true even after accounting for any other factors. When male fictional characters die it is seen as less tragic than when female fictional characters die. Men make up 93% of workplace deaths, 77% of homicides, 80% of suicides, and 97% of the people killed by police. And SRS is against anybody acknowledging or talking about any of that. And that's just one post, not even getting into their other posts defending a woman's right to falsely accuse men of rape or attacking people who think that male victims of DV shouldn't be ignored, or defending even the most extreme corners of feminism against any form of criticism.

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

        I don't necessarily agree with all your statements but something similar I'd like to point out is that rape jokes are considered (quite rightly) unacceptable to make in polite discourse or even risque comedy. I don't even think Family Guy makes rape jokes. OK well that's very reasonable. However, prison rape jokes are made by all sorts of comedy, from Veep to Arrested Development, and nobody blinks an eye.

        [–]yoda133113 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

        I don't even think Family Guy makes rape jokes.

        I agree with you, but just making a clarification, they have, though all of them involve Quagmire, and are not very direct.

        コメントをもっと表示する (14 返事)

          [–]Manception 52ポイント53ポイント  (37子コメント)

          Men make up 93% of workplace deaths

          The same people who complain about this dismiss women's lower wages with free choice. Women choose low-paying jobs for their own reasons, therefore they deserve to earn less. Men clearly choose dangerous jobs for their own reasons, so according to free choice logic, what do they deserve?

          Either we accept negative outcomes of these choices, or we don't and look at the underlying structures that inform them.

          [–]CrazyLegs88 7ポイント8ポイント  (2子コメント)

          The difference is, is that men don't blame women for work place fatalities.

          Women, however, blame the wage gap on men and feel they have an unfair lot in society. When confronted by the statistics that show how men are often sacrificed to uphold society, feminists throw a tantrum and go apeshit.

          [–]a3wagner 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

          Sure, I agree, but we have the PotUS talking about one of these issues and not the other. We have mainstream media talking about one of these issues and not the other. Evidently, society wants to fix one of these things but not the other.

          Like you say, one has to either accept both or dismiss both -- but neither of these options seems to be the prevailing opinion.

          [–]Sacrix -3ポイント-2ポイント  (2子コメント)

          dismiss women's lower wages with free choice.

          I do hope you're not suggesting that if 10 males are doctors, and 10 females are nurses, they have to get equal wages just to even out the total? Because the thing with free choice is exactly that: It's the goddamn reason for the apparent but false differences in salaries. Perhaps there are some backwards countries where such differences actually still exist, but in general, not in the Western world.

          Edit: No, I'm pretty sure that's not what he was saying there. I read it just fine.

          [–]grraaaaahhh 18ポイント19ポイント  (1子コメント)

          No, he's saying that to argue that the reason for the wage gap is free choice and not the reason for workplace deaths being overwhelmingly male is inherently hypocritical. Maybe you should read posts before replying.

          [–]Bethistopheles 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

          Men work in more dangerous professions. Those types of jobs need to keep their employees as safe as possible. If corners are cut, we should advocate to change things.

          I sincerely doubt you'd find such a disparity between mortality rates among business professional coeds. An apples to apples comparison is more useful than apples to oranges. Male welders vs female, for example.

          コメントをもっと表示する (15 返事)

            [–]spacemoses 26ポイント27ポイント  (4子コメント)

            I got banned from there for being a gamer, so there's that.

            [–]cjf_colluns 1ポイント2ポイント  (12子コメント)

            This is the top voted comment from the SRS thread you mention about mocking men being disposable:

            He raises a few legitimate issues that men face and instead of addressing those issues he just uses them as a way to attack women and feminism. This is why the "men's rights" movement is a fucking joke.

            I 100% agree with that.

            I see it all the time here on reddit. I'll be reading someone's comment about issues that affect men, and I'm like 9 sentences in and I'm loving it. Then I read 3 more sentences that conclude this so far amazing comment with, "fuuucckk femminiismm," and I've lost all hope for the future of everything. This literally just happened with your comment.

            It's like these statistics about men killing themselves only get brought up as a way of perpetuating a war against women and feminists, instead of actually trying to engage in a conversation about why men are apparently killing themselves at a much higher rate than women.

            Like, do you want to talk about that or do you just want to rage about feminism?

            [–]triggermethis 12ポイント13ポイント  (11子コメント)

            From the parent comment:

            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.

            Feminists are literally attacking men's rights movements. But you better not point that shit out, else you're just another fedora wearing mra misogynist.

            [–]AndaliteBandit 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

            77% of homicides

            And they cause 90.5% of homicides. Should we then dismiss male homicide victims? No, for the same reason that we shouldn't dismiss black male homicide victims when most of them are the victims of other black males. However, these relationships merits discussion if we ever hope to try and address these problems.

            And that's just one post, not even getting into their other posts defending a woman's right to falsely accuse men of rape or attacking people who think that male victims of DV shouldn't be ignored, or defending even the most extreme corners of feminism against any form of criticism.

            I don't follow SRS, so could you link to examples of this for me?

            [–]faceyourfaces 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

            One of the top posts in there now is mocking somebody for saying "men are the disposable gender." They mock the idea of male disposability.

            Nice strawman straight up lie. The top comment (which has more upvotes than the actual post as of the time of writing) reads:

            He raises a few legitimate issues that men face and instead of addressing those issues he just uses them as a way to attack women and feminism. This is why the "men's rights" movement is a fucking joke.

            [–]im_eddie_snowden 13ポイント14ポイント  (19子コメント)

            One of the top posts in there now is mocking somebody for saying "men are the disposable gender."

            Mocking somebody over their opinion is a far stretch from mocking somebody over their skin color.

            [–]Snowfire870 12ポイント13ポイント  (9子コメント)

            Well it is mocking half the worlds population if you talk about gender compaired to less then half if your talking about race. Not that it doesnt need to be adress of course just that discreminating against gender be it male or female is a big problem too that doesnt see color.

            [–]im_eddie_snowden 4ポイント5ポイント  (7子コメント)

            I don't care for SRS myself so don't take this as me defending their stance. I stepped in once, glanced around, and backed out slowly never to return.

            I just think its a bit of stretch to compare the irrationality of over zealous PC advocates to the kinds of things that went on in /r/coontown .

            コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

              [–]CoralFang -2ポイント-1ポイント  (0子コメント)

              Thank youuuuuu!! These guys who think that they are somehow being oppressed by people disagreeing with them or poking fun at their backwards views are ridiculous. No one is mocking them for anything they couldn't immediately change. Also, if your "opinions" are that women and non-white people are in any way inferior to white men, then you are pretty much objectively wrong and deserve to be corrected, and when that fails, yes you deserve to be ridiculed for it. If everyone starts just letting racist and sexist comments slide, then the people who make them will think they are acceptable, and the world will get a little worse for everyone else.

              コメントをもっと表示する (8 返事)

                [–]CANOODLING_SOCIOPATH 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                Did you not read the comments of that post?

                The top comment is

                He raises a few legitimate issues that men face and instead of addressing those issues he just uses them as a way to attack women and feminism. This is why the "men's rights" movement is a fucking joke.

                コメントをもっと表示する (121 返事)

                  [–]Acrolith 10ポイント11ポイント  (5子コメント)

                  Calling SRS hate speech always reminds me of a neo-nazi complaining about the Southern Poverty Law Center. Someone calling out a hateful group for their bullshit is not the same thing as being hateful themselves.

                  This is absolutely true. SRS is certainly hateful, though. Not because of their views (which I agree with more often than not), but because, well, they're hateful people.

                  It is certainly very possible to have a community that fights to dispel racist, sexist, or otherwise harmful views without taking joy in harassing and hurting people. /r/SRSDiscussion is a good example of this; despite the similarity of the name, the style of discourse there couldn't be more different from SRS. SRSDiscussion encourages sane, reasonable, polite discussion, where SRS actively works to suppress thought and encourage fanatical, unreasoning hatred.

                  I don't think SRS should be banned (unlike CoonTown, I don't think their brand of narcissistic rage translates to significant real-life harm), but I certainly think they should be ashamed of what they've become.

                  Also, for the record, I'm glad CoonTown and friends were banned, even though it probably means the shitheads who used to quarantine themselves there will now pop up in subreddits I actually care about. I think banning it was a necessary and positive step.

                  [–]triggermethis 4ポイント5ポイント  (4子コメント)

                  SRSDiscussion

                  Bullshit. They ban anyone that won't adhere to their beliefs just as fast as SRS does. These subs are full of nothing but fanatic zealots practicing and peddling a racist and subversionist ideology. Bunch of freaks.

                  [–]Acrolith 2ポイント3ポイント  (3子コメント)

                  There's... nothing inherently wrong with that, though? A lot of subs have enforced standards for content. /r/conservative will ban you if you try to debate against conservatism (they say so right in their sidebar.) /r/christianity will also ban you if you aren't respectful of their beliefs. /r/science will ban you if you try to argue against global warming.

                  Disallowing certain types of argument (especially belligerent types) is actually necessary for any minority viewpoint to have a space on Reddit (and both Conservatives and Christians are clearly minorities here, even if they aren't in the US as a whole.) Feminists and their ilk also deserve to have their own subreddit(s) like everyone else where they can talk amongst themselves about the things that interest them, without every thread turning into a debate with Redditors who don't accept the basic premise of their philosophy.

                  Reddit provides a platform for (almost) every opinion, but it doesn't mean you can, or should be allowed to, post that opinion in every subreddit. There's a reason subreddits are self-governed, each having their own moderators.

                  If you're legitimately interested in progressive (or feminist, or "SJW") beliefs, the SRSDiscussion people will happily explain their point of view to you. I guarantee you'll learn something. If you're looking to win an internet argument against the evil SJWs, then no, you won't be welcome there. If that bothers you, you might just be a little too in love with the sound of your own voice.

                  [–]SobStoryBob 152ポイント153ポイント  (14子コメント)

                  Your use of hyperbole is astounding. Would the Southern Poverty Law Center behave like this?

                  https://www.reddit.com/r/SRSsucks/comments/3fc9qg/update_im_the_girl_who_received_rape_threats/

                  [–]YouWantMeKnob 22ポイント23ポイント  (0子コメント)

                  Well, you see, she deserved to have that said about her because she was a troll being trolled by trolls trolling the trolling trolls. The only reason she was offended by those rape threats is because she herself is a rape apologist far right Rethuglikkkan Nazi rapist. /s

                  コメントをもっと表示する (13 返事)

                    [–]JamesMean 43ポイント44ポイント  (17子コメント)

                    Yeah, it's not hate speech and it's absurd to say it is. However, it does fit within "a handful of communities that exist solely to annoy other redditors". I mean, really, why does it exist? And this of course includes communities in the opposite end of the spectrum and you could almost make a case for TiA (though that exists to annoy tumblr users, so it might just be safe).

                    Basically, the policy is obviously inconsistent and hence worse than useless.

                    [–]sammythemc 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                    I don't agree that its inconsistency makes it worse than useless. We know why /r/coontown was banned, the inconsistencies are in the fig leafs covering the decision in order to avoid a user revolt. The admins are grown up enough to realize the difference between /r/coontown and /r/shitredditsays even if the site's legalists can't or won't or are pretending not to.

                    コメントをもっと表示する (15 返事)

                      [–]yaschobob 14ポイント15ポイント  (0子コメント)

                      Second: SRS is designed to provoke the ire of people, but it's not hateful. And the people it irks are just having their own words thrown back at them. It's just trolls trolling trolls, except that people are taking it all very seriously, which is weird.

                      Actually, SRS states clearly in their FAQ that they are bigoted except they "punch up, not down."

                      They're exactly like coontown and are just as hateful.

                      [–]OfficerDarrenWilson 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

                      First: The distinction between subreddits that could promote real life harm to innocent third parties and those subreddits that simply anger other Redditors. Some websites either have users that are predisposed to violence against minorities or, perhaps, spur otherwise non-violent individuals to violence.

                      Far and away the most frequent type of actual real world interracial violence is black on white. Dylan Roof was a big story because it was a massive rarity, an aberration. Yet black on white crime happens all the time, at a vastly higher rate than vice versa.

                      So why isn't there furor about sites that explicitly condone and encourage hate crimes against white people? Why isn't Wordpress tossed into a pot of boiling water for hosting this sort of stuff, vastly worse than coontown, much nastier, and unlike coontown regularly condoning, celebrating, and encouraging real world acts of physical violence?

                      https://blackfootsoldier.wordpress.com/category/national-black-foot-soldier-network/

                      https://underprivilegedtags.wordpress.com/

                      https://ghettobraggingrightsmagazine.wordpress.com/

                      Why isn't everyone complaining about how 'toxic' Wordpress is for hosting - for FREE! - such abhorrent content?

                      Especially as this content actually seems to create more real world harm, violence, rape, and murder?

                      Answer: Because the anti-white media and civilization destroying SJW scum are the among the worst racists in America today, and you have to spend all your time pointing your fingers at other racists to attempt to deflect it.

                      [–]freshhfruits 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

                      "their own words thrown back at them"?

                      if we're gonna go by logical fallacies, say hello to the good old strawman.

                      people are arguing they brigade and harass as much as anyone else, which is explicitly TRUE.

                      i hated coontown but i dont like ideological positions dictating what's ok and what isn't.

                      [–]fabis 69ポイント70ポイント  (3子コメント)

                      The problem is, to SRS everyone who disagrees with them is a "neo-nazi".

                      [–]yggdrasils_roots 12ポイント13ポイント  (2子コメント)

                      Or rape apologist, or misogynist, or a pedo, or any other number of things.

                      [–]TheRedGerund 120ポイント121ポイント  (1子コメント)

                      Oh, yeah, because that's all that SRS does; fight for justice.

                      /s

                      [–]PM_ur_Rump 8ポイント9ポイント  (0子コメント)

                      Something something two wrongs something something not right.

                      Something something eye for an eye something something blind.

                      [–]Meoang 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

                      It's basically an echo-chamber for people to share how much they hate various things. No one is ever constructive or positive, they just use it as a place to vent about things that piss them off. I kind of get that they want to have their own place where no one will judge them for being hateful about certain things, but saying that it's not about hate is disingenuous. If they kept to themselves, though, no one would care, but apparently that's too much to ask.

                      [–]killjoie 14ポイント15ポイント  (0子コメント)

                      It's the same strategy used by domestic abusers, who claim that they're the real victim in incidents where they physically harm their partners.

                      [–]komali_2 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

                      Are you suggesting that members of SRS aren't prone to violence because they are women?

                      [–]moeburn 5ポイント6ポイント  (17子コメント)

                      Calling SRS hate speech always reminds me of a neo-nazi complaining about the Southern Poverty Law Center.

                      Are you comparing people who call SRS hate speech to neo-nazis?

                      Someone calling out a hateful group for their bullshit is not the same thing as being hateful themselves.

                      If only that's what SRS was.

                      [–]jimmy17 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

                      You're talking about a sub who call's black people "uncle tom" for not acting black enough and it's users (who by their own survey are mostly white men) sent rape threats to women after a post of hers from another thread made it onto SRS. When the woman complained she was mocked by the moderators and "benned". How the fuck is that punching up?

                      [–]silver_nuke13 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                      Someone calling out a hateful group for their bullshit is not the same thing as being hateful themselves.

                      Yes it is. I mean, it can be. Look at r/againsthatesubreddits

                      That's a hate sub itself.

                      People will fight hate with more hate. Do i need to show you this?

                      It's clear that some people go too far, thinking they are entitled just because they are in the good guys camp.

                      [–]OldLeopardSkin 30ポイント31ポイント  (13子コメント)

                      Have you ever visited SRS?

                      [–]Compliant_Automaton -1ポイント0ポイント  (12子コメント)

                      Yeah, I did before posting. The vast majority of posts are quotes from other subreddits.

                      If we're going to start complaining about whoever's view we don't like, then I'd love to get rid of that red pill subreddit - but I am pretty sure that's not the point of Reddit.

                      Instead, I get the impression that just because something may be objectionable to some people at Reddit doesn't mean it should be banned. Hence the existence of subreddits I don't like, which are completely separate from ones you don't like.

                      [–]the-incredible-ape 10ポイント11ポイント  (4子コメント)

                      I get the impression that just because something may be objectionable to some people at Reddit doesn't mean it should be banned.

                      NB: The more important factor is how much shit they get in the press for hosting a sub, not how shitty it makes the UX. Subs hating on black people or women play very badly in the press. SRS plays well in the press, so it stays. Not complicated.

                      [–]puterTDI 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

                      Here's an example of the results from that sub that you should be aware of:

                      https://www.reddit.com/r/SRSsucks/comments/3fc9qg/update_im_the_girl_who_received_rape_threats/

                      If they kept their shit to themselves then I'd be fine, but they don't...and frankly they don't exist to. They exist in order to intentionally piss people off and they should be gone.

                      コメントをもっと表示する (6 返事)

                        コメントをもっと表示する (28 返事)

                          [–]rhubarbtart 6ポイント7ポイント  (3子コメント)

                          I'm gonna ask a question I'm gonna get downvoted for but if someone could answer anyway that'd be nice.
                          What's terrible about /r/shitredditsays? I don't know that much about Reddit, or that sub, but when I have ended up there after clicking through to it after seeing it being called "hateful" or "bigoted", I never find anything that... bad? If fact, when I scroll through it I feel quite reassured that a lot of that stuff is being called out. Because I do find Reddit to be quite a sexist site at times. Obviously there's shit there I don't agree should be called out, but what pisses people off is subjective I suppose. The sub does seem to just be calling out shitty, harmful things people on this frequently shitty site have said. And that is INCREDIBLY different to coontown.
                          But I get your point totally, have some balls and ban the racist sub for being racist, but really my response is about shitredditsays... what's so terrible?

                          [–]kingofkingsss 4ポイント5ポイント  (2子コメント)

                          The sub itself appears relatively tame, however, its members go into the thread and harass individuals, spamming their pm, and even on occasion, doxxing. These are the same things that the admins have said hate subs do and these are the reasons that the hate subs have been banned.

                          [–]chicagofirefifa3 78ポイント79ポイント  (60子コメント)

                          Apparently only certain types of bigotry

                          yes, super-racist shit is considered generally beyond the realms of civilized discourse. Now some people want to extend those bans to other places and others will naturally object but this isn't that move. The mensrights version of against mensrights isn't getting banned

                          [–]meatpuppet79 253ポイント254ポイント  (40子コメント)

                          "we are banning a handful of communities that exist solely to annoy other redditors". How ever you would like to dress up SRS, no matter how heroic or justified you think they are, a site like this will live or die by the even handedness of the application of its myriad little bylaws and rules and bureaucracy. The absence of that was what caused reddit such grief in the past. All things being equal, SRS should go.

                          [–]chicagofirefifa3 85ポイント86ポイント  (11子コメント)

                          All things being equal, SRS should go.

                          no /u/spez is being dishonest because lots of reddit is uncomfortable with banning speech you dislike/hate (though this sort of racism doesn't necessarily trigger the slippery slope people fear, sometimes with reason)

                          He can't come out and simply say "guys coontown is uber racist/uberevil we've wanted to ban it for a long time but haven't found a good reason for banning it so we're just going for it and this is a neutralish sounding explination so it doesn't seem like we are targeting them for holding and evil ideology even though we are".

                          SRS isn't getting banned because this isn't going after trolling/annoying sites.

                          [–]Raveynfyre 30ポイント31ポイント  (9子コメント)

                          SRS isn't getting banned because this isn't going after trolling/annoying sites.

                          This is the part that irritates me the most. That is exactly what the admins are saying this change is all about word-for-fucking-word (see quote below). Yet those other hate subs SRS/ SRD/ 2XC and others do precisely what this announcement says they are trying to eliminate.

                          I think this announcement is just to placate the "typical redditor" and has little to no impact on what will ACTUALLY be done to punish offenders for harassing people.

                          /u/spez said

                          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.

                          They need to put their money where their mouth is, or this will be the straw for many communities to move elsewhere.

                          [–]lilit_ 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

                          They need to put their money where their mouth is, or this will be the straw for many communities to move elsewhere.

                          Oh God I hope so

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

                          Uh, how the hell is 2XC a "hate sub"?

                          [–]myrealreddit 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

                          Christ people on this website are insane. 2XC is a hate subreddit, but men's rights must be saved from the SRS persecution. Right.

                          コメントをもっと表示する (4 返事)

                            コメントをもっと表示する (2 返事)

                              [–]kidawesome 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

                              SRS does not get Reddit bad publicity on CNN and the media. They are targeting subreddits that will hurt their bottom lime. At least that is how I see it.

                              Banning fatpersonhate was getting ahead of the curve after they were burned over and over with /r/jailbait, thefappening, amongst other issues. At least that is how i see it.

                              [–]Fish-With-Sharks 5ポイント6ポイント  (13子コメント)

                              isn't SRS just a bunch of people trolling? No one can really be dumb enough to believe what is posted there.

                              [–]OneOfDozens 26ポイント27ポイント  (4子コメント)

                              It was trolls only, then enough stupid people took it seriously and joined in, now there's no way to tell who is who

                              [–]Redrum714 14ポイント15ポイント  (0子コメント)

                              I think its a mixture of trolls and mentally ill people.

                              [–]habs76 2ポイント3ポイント  (3子コメント)

                              SRS says on the side it's a big circlejerk. Yes people there dislike racism/sexism/regressive ideas etc... but no one thinks they're going to change anything. Besides it's a meta sub, it doesn't exist to create hate, it exists to make fun of redditors. No one on there says we should kill redditors, they say redditors are dumb and not a particularly welcoming bunch to minorities. And I mean hey, if that's as bad as coontown was, that says something about who the posters on reddit are.

                              コメントをもっと表示する (2 返事)

                                コメントをもっと表示する (14 返事)

                                  [–]drogean3 117ポイント118ポイント  (9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.

                                  did you miss this part? thats SRS in a nutshell

                                  [–]dogGirl666 5ポイント6ポイント  (6子コメント)

                                  /r/againstmensrights is not actually against men's rights. If you read their sidebar you'd understand. It is against the pseudo men's rights people that do not help men or anyone at all. Read the reddit MRA site it is full of hate for women, not, "let's organize and fight for more fair outcomes in divorce"[like my brother desperately needs].

                                  [–]mmencius 4ポイント5ポイント  (3子コメント)

                                  Without much knowledge of either sub being mentioned I believe the specific objection to /r/againstmensrights was that members of that sub leave that sub to go and harass other people (even if they are going to harass "bad people" which you and I would probably agree on). Brigading. The poster who brought that up wanted some consistency in banning all brigading subreddits.

                                  コメントをもっと表示する (2 返事)

                                    コメントをもっと表示する (2 返事)

                                      [–]Colonel_Blimp 26ポイント27ポイント  (19子コメント)

                                      Haha wow you think either of those are as bad as coontown? I know people from both and none of them have an problem with men or anything in the way people like you think. Coontown is dedicated to despising black people full stop.

                                      EDIT - Love the bullshit postscript using Warren Farrell as a glorious example of free speech. This is nothing to do with free speech.

                                      [–]Will_Im_Not 197ポイント198ポイント  (225子コメント)

                                      Haha I love how you mention /r/shitredditsays but not /r/SRSsucks. Because "harassing" a community is only bad when it goes in a certain direction.

                                      [–]torma616[🍰] 337ポイント338ポイント  (33子コメント)

                                      Yes, SRSSucks should also be banned, but quite simply, banning SRS nullifies the need for SRSSucks. If banning one of them would kill them both while banning the other would only kill the other, it makes more sense to go after the first.

                                      [–]Number357 184ポイント185ポイント  (3子コメント)

                                      SRSsucks would voluntarily delete their sub if SRS was banned.

                                      [–]TheThng 69ポイント70ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                      I'm pretty sure I can speak for many SRSSucks members, as many have mentioned in the past, that we would gladly have SRSSucks not exist if SRS did not exist.

                                      [–]Chiafriend12 8ポイント9ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                      if you ban SRS, ban SRSsucks too!

                                      that's actually fair ok I can agree to this lol

                                      kek

                                      [–]rrrx 212ポイント213ポイント  (142子コメント)

                                      Nor does he mention /r/TheRedPill, which has also neither been banned nor quarantined.

                                      How curious, that.

                                      [–]koncept61 28ポイント29ポイント  (21子コメント)

                                      trp is an echo chamber. They don't brigade and they dont harass. Maybe individual members do but the subreddit exists to simply propagate their belief. And their belief isn't all that bad it's just a few of them who take it too far and that's what reddit sees.

                                      [–]The_Bravinator 3ポイント4ポイント  (2子コメント)

                                      And their belief isn't all that bad it's just a few of them who take it too far and that's what reddit sees.

                                      Do the views and links in their own sidebar count as "a few of them taking it too far"?

                                      コメントをもっと表示する (18 返事)

                                        [–]Number357 154ポイント155ポイント  (41子コメント)

                                        TRP doesn't brigade though, they're forgettable.

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

                                        Neither did coontown.

                                        [–]p_iynx 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                        They do too. I've seen multiple threads get brigaded by TRP because it was "mentioned" in a comment or post in TRP.

                                        [–]kullisankari 26ポイント27ポイント  (2子コメント)

                                        Neither does coontown

                                        コメントをもっと表示する (36 返事)

                                          [–]Will_Im_Not 100ポイント101ポイント  (36子コメント)

                                          Eh, at least TRP stays in their sad corner of this website. They're pathetic but not really concerned about anything else that's going on.

                                          [–]Trosso 7ポイント8ポイント  (12子コメント)

                                          If TRP goes you'll have to remove all MRA, feminist, sociological subs too

                                          [–]Hunter2isit 10ポイント11ポイント  (16子コメント)

                                          What has TRP done to warrant being banned exactly? Cite the post

                                          コメントをもっと表示する (11 返事)

                                            [–][deleted] 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                            He listed the 2 biggest targets when it comes to subreddit bans. He's not going to analyze every single subreddit and compile a list of all the ones which deserve to be banned according to spez's justifications. And I'm sure most people who know of SRS have never even heard of SRSsucks

                                            [–]drew46n2 12ポイント13ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                            For all the bellyaching the teenage neckbeards of Reddit do over "SJWs" being offended and triggered, they sure seem to be perpetually offended and triggered.

                                            [–]MaximilianKohler 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                            I've never seen SRSsucks harassing anyone.

                                            コメントをもっと表示する (39 返事)

                                              [–]Wrecksomething -5ポイント-4ポイント  (18子コメント)

                                              There is nothing hateful in that speech, yet the campus feminist group protested his speech in the weeks leading up to it.

                                              No on protested that this particular speech was hateful. You could play this game for any bigot; they all have some sentences that aren't hate speech.

                                              MRAs are hated for stuff like saying all evil comes from women and women do not have moral agency.

                                              Farrell specifically is criticized for his interviews with Playboy magazine where he recklessly and unscientifically suggested children might like sexual abuse until society teaches them not to. And for giving all rapists this great get-out-of-jail card,

                                              And it is also important when her nonverbal “yeses” (tongues still touching) conflict with those verbal “noes” that the man not be put in jail for choosing the “yes” over the “no.” He might just be trying to become her fantasy.

                                              Apparently it shouldn't be illegal to ignore explicit "no" in sex.

                                              And, you know, for saying men are sex robots who can't control themselves around butts.

                                              You may not like that source but if you want to hear what his actual critics are upset about, there isn't any better.

                                              [–]peenoid 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                              I'm sorry, but how does that change anything? Or are we just accepting that preventing people from saying things that offend us is normal and acceptable in our society now?

                                              [–]Wrecksomething 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                              Farrell is not entitled to a platform; that's not what free speech means.

                                              Showing why others might use their own free speech to decry Farrell is a much more constructive conversation than pretending they dislike him for saying boys need help in school. Surely they don't have to be silent just because their protests offend some.

                                              And the topic is "Why isn't AgainstMensRights banned?" As far as I can tell the subreddit hasn't prevented Farrell from saying things.

                                              コメントをもっと表示する (15 返事)

                                                [–]enoughofthisalready 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                The problem with Mens' Rights being seen as hateful is real, but one of the main reasons it is seen as such is because of the hateful behavior of groups like A Voice For Men and reddits /r/TheRedPill.

                                                Protip: if you do not want to be seen as a hate-group, do not operate as a hate-group.

                                                Meanwhile, it's up to us (-"non hateful, reasonable men"-) to find an alternative mode of expression that can undo the damage done by people like Roosh and Whatshisface.

                                                [EDIT: Dr. Farrell seems like a dude with his head screwed on right, I'll read up on him. Thanks!]

                                                [–]SandyRegolith 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                Here is a 2.5 hour speech

                                                I guarantee you nobody is going to take 10% of an entire day to watch that then get back to this thread. Surely there's a better way to sum up this guy's thesis than demanding we watch him speak for 150 minutes?

                                                [–]amazing_rando 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                The controversy regarding Warren Farrell is about his statements regarding date rape, not his discussion of those particular topics. It's dishonest to say that these people were protesting the discussion of male suicide or dropouts, or calling the discussion of those topics "hate speech."

                                                I'm not saying that they're right to protest the way they did, but it does nobody any favors to mischaracterize what they were actually protesting.

                                                [–]BowserKoopa 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                Recent Submission history for Number357:

                                                subreddit submitted to count %
                                                MensRights 17 53%
                                                todayilearned 5 16%
                                                news 4 13%
                                                OneY 2 6%
                                                subredditcancer 1 3%
                                                MensRants 1 3%
                                                FeMRADebates 1 3%
                                                PussyPass 1 3%

                                                Edit:

                                                Quick comment breakdown of top five commented locations

                                                sub amt pct
                                                MensRights 282 28%
                                                TwoXChromosomes 210 21%
                                                FeMRADebates 119 12%
                                                TumblrInAction 104 20%
                                                OneY 47 5%

                                                [–]James_Knox_Polk 92ポイント93ポイント  (41子コメント)

                                                Could you provide some evidence to support your assertion that those are even remotely comparable to /r/coontown?

                                                [–]NonViolentWar 4ポイント5ポイント  (6子コメント)

                                                You missed the point entirely. The point is that they're clearly banning content, not the behavior that they say they're claiming to be banning for (brigading and pissing off other redditors.) it's hypocritical and, yet again, Reddits fucking CEO can't just come out and say "we can't have this content here because it offends people and makes us look bad so we can't make money."

                                                According to their rules SRS is CLEARLY worse than /r/coontown because the later actually aggressively enforced an anti brigading policy while SRSs entire existence is based on the process of brigading threads, changing discussions, and downvoting things they disagree with.

                                                Is SRS as bad as coontown in terms of being offensive or racist....no. But that shouldn't matter according to Reddits own policy.

                                                [–]verystinkyfingers 20ポイント21ポイント  (6子コメント)

                                                Im not the guy you asked, but had you asked me id say that none of them have any impact on any of our lives, unless you are a subscriber.

                                                Barring the brigaders, they are all firmly in the 'who gives a shit if they exist' category.

                                                [–]Seattle_man_123 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                Good luck with getting a response. They like to complain about others being offended but get up in arms when there are people who say they're bigots.

                                                コメントをもっと表示する (26 返事)

                                                  [–]faore 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                  You just admitted that the bans were for content. That's why SRS is not banned.

                                                  You can't argue both ways at the same time

                                                  [–]punecityexpat 483ポイント484ポイント  (69子コメント)

                                                  comparing SRS to coontown?

                                                  jesus christ mate, you need to go out more.

                                                  [–]foobar5678 428ポイント429ポイント  (7子コメント)

                                                  The criteria for banning is if the community exists "solely to annoy other redditors." Coontown doesn't exist to annoy other redditors. It exists for racists to circlejerk amongst themselves. A quarantine is the right tool to use here. But SRS does exist soley to annoy other redditors, and so it should be banned.

                                                  This issue isn't with banning coontown. The issue is that it doesn't meet their criteria for a ban. It does, however, make reddit look bad. And that's why it was banned. If their content policy said you can't be racist, then go ahead and ban it. But Reddit made a content policy that makes them look good, and then they went ahead and ignored it so they could ban the communities that give them bad PR. That is what /u/Number357 meant by

                                                  it would be nice if for once reddit could just be honest.

                                                  [–]IBeBallinOutaControl -4ポイント-3ポイント  (2子コメント)

                                                  True, he seems to be correct with his point about content vs annoying other redditors (although coontown were frequent vote brigaders too), however to compare men's rights or srs to coontown just seems to be another example of reddit young white male American demographic whipping themselves into a victim frenzy over something that they perceive to be persecuting them.

                                                  I'm a white male and even I know that someone questioning a movement nominally dedicated to your rights (againstmensrights) is nothing compared to the pain and humiliation of experiencing racism. I would feel embarrassed to recommend reddit to friends or family due to how notorious it is for stupid witchhunts and racism. Today is a step in the right direction

                                                  コメントをもっと表示する (4 返事)

                                                    [–][deleted] 11ポイント12ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                    It seems you completely misunderstood his comment

                                                    [–]HepMeJeebus 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                    SRS can certainly be compared to coontown with regards to redditt rule violations. SRS brigades and harasses and everybody knows it. Since we are cleaning house why not not ban arguably the worst offending sub on the sight.

                                                    [–]piv0t 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                    I think he's comparing the idea that /r/coontown existed to annoy people just like /r/shitredditsays does. In fact, the rule to ban these subs was literally written before this post, specifically to ban /r/coontown, a sub, which I might add, /u/spez said does not violate any rules and, if anything, will be quarantined. He has since lied about that. Here's more proof http://vgy.me/1GGqsl.png

                                                    This site is a joke.. A shell of what it used to be. It exists solely to make money, and anyone controlling the money controls the rules. It is no longer a place to expect the truth, only the narrative.

                                                    There's evidence that some easily offended, rhymes with F Kay Double Jew crowd decided to mass email Reddit advertises to force this to happen. And that's fine. But it reveals exactly what I said earlier in that there nothing here but whatever the moneyhats want.

                                                    Good riddance.

                                                    コメントをもっと表示する (37 返事)

                                                      [–]ImmmOldGregg 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                      EXACTLY this. Banning communities because they don't agree with the "norm" is a very slippery slope...

                                                      [–]Thatcoolguy1135 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                      I'm sure this isn't really reddits fault though. African American racism in the United States is a HUGE issue. The idiots who made the names of these forums picked names that go along with racism and these are the names that users see in order to get into the subreddit. Obviously there must of been tons and tons of complains so obviously their going to take the ones that get the most complaints and look for excuses to get rid of them. It's discretionary punishment, a police officer is more likely to ticket a person whose rude than let them off with a warning which they can do. Sub-reddits like this were doomed when they had the offensive racist names to go along with awful content.

                                                      [–]nardonardo123 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                      Jesus Christ the entitlement of some people. They're a private company that has investors and a parent company to appeal to. They have fuck all to explain to the 1% of their users that can't see the obvious reasons why subreddits dedicated to racist and extremely offensive content are shut down. Would YOU like to explain that to an advertiser who's avoiding spending a lot of money with you because of the potential bad press that comes with hosting content that sexualizes minors (Lolita) or overt racism/fph/etc.

                                                      You have the freedom of speech but that doesn't apply to privately-hosted sites like reddit.

                                                      [–]Atrus354 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                      In regards to your edit about hate speech the one thing I find that a lot of institutions do not seem to realize is that hate speech, even if you feel that it is hate speech, is still free speech. No one in this country on the Internet or on this website has the right to decide what is and what isn't. You do not have the right to ban or censor speech that you find offensive however you do have the right to not listen to or read that speech.

                                                      [–]RazsterOxzine 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                      They're banning this because the Advertisers don't want their products associated with a site that host racist threads. If you get a chance to just sit back and watch the top subreddits you will see product placement all over. /r/videos is showing more and more ads each day.

                                                      Reddit is gone. I'm only here for my /r/Justrolledintotheshop , /r/rccars and /r/Miata - The rest I have filtered thanks to RES.

                                                      [–]Aerik 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                      dude, all AMR does is document shit and laugh at it. that's seriously all we do. and nothing we point out is devoid of bigotry, so we're actually a legitimate watchdog.

                                                      we don't brigade. we don't invade. we don't harass, or dox, or spread hatred or any of that shit.

                                                      in fact if dudebros like you weren't actually stalking us, you wouldn't even notice us, much less hate us

                                                      [–]BonSequitur 37ポイント38ポイント  (45子コメント)

                                                      /u/isreactionarybot Number357

                                                      [–]isReactionaryBot 82ポイント83ポイント  (23子コメント)

                                                      Number357 post history contains participation in the following subreddits:

                                                      /r/subredditcancer: 1 posts (1), combined score: 68; 2 comments (1, 2), combined score: 16.

                                                      /r/MensRights: 17 posts (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8), combined score: 3304; 282 comments (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8), combined score: 2445.

                                                      /r/TumblrInAction: 104 comments (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8), combined score: 1967.

                                                      /r/SandersForPresident: 2 comments (1, 2), combined score: 1.

                                                      /r/KotakuInAction: 14 comments (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8), combined score: 17.

                                                      /r/undelete: 8 comments (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8), combined score: 58.

                                                      /r/conspiracy: 1 comments (1), combined score: 5.

                                                      /r/thatHappened: 1 comments (1), combined score: 14.

                                                      Total score: 7895

                                                      Recommended Gulag Sentence: Execution.

                                                      I am a bot. Only the past 1,000 posts and comments are fetched.

                                                      [–]grungebuddy 14ポイント15ポイント  (8子コメント)

                                                      Sanders for President? Someone doesn't know the meaning of reactionary

                                                      [–]PCGamingOppression 9ポイント10ポイント  (3子コメント)

                                                      LOL WHAT

                                                      Thathappened and berniesanders are considered reactionary??? Lmao wtf???

                                                      So does reactionary at this point just mean I don't like this?

                                                      [–]SonicFrost 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                      Wow, somebody really thought to do something this fucking asinine?

                                                      [–]jbradfield 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                      This is my new favorite reddit bot.

                                                      コメントをもっと表示する (8 返事)

                                                        [–]dvidsilva 2ポイント3ポイント  (14子コメント)

                                                        What is this bot? Why is sanders related to Kia?

                                                        コメントをもっと表示する (6 返事)

                                                          [–]Professor_Kickass 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                          As a nit-pick, women are actually 3 times more likely to attempt suicide, men are more likely to succeed at suicide. The theory behind this is that women are more likely to use less violent methods, like pills, and men are more likely to use violent methods, like a gun.

                                                          [–]Treysef 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                          Might want to add in the time SRS drove someone to suicide.

                                                          コメントをもっと表示する (135 返事)