jump to content
my subreddits
more »
want to join? sign in or create an account in seconds|
[-]
use the following search parameters to narrow your results:
subreddit:subreddit
find submissions in "subreddit"
author:username
find submissions by "username"
site:example.com
find submissions from "example.com"
url:text
search for "text" in url
selftext:text
search for "text" in self post contents
self:yes (or self:no)
include (or exclude) self posts
nsfw:yes (or nsfw:no)
include (or exclude) results marked as NSFW
e.g. subreddit:aww site:imgur.com dog
this post was submitted on
1,271 points (63% upvoted)
shortlink:
reset password
submission in this subreddit is restricted to approved submitters.

announcements

subscribeunsubscribe9,083,044 readers
2,262 users here now
Official announcements from the reddit admins.
See also:
created by raldia community for
No problem. We won't show you that ad again. Why didn't you like it?
Oops! I didn't mean to do this.
1270
1271
1272
submitted by spez[A]
Today we are releasing an update to our Content Policy. Our goal was to consolidate the various rules and policies that have accumulated over the years into a single set of guidelines we can point to.
Thank you to all of you who provided feedback throughout this process. Your thoughts and opinions were invaluable. This is not the last time our policies will change, of course. They will continue to evolve along with Reddit itself.
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.
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.
I believe these policies strike the right balance.
update: I know some of you are upset because we banned anything today, but the fact of the matter is we spend a disproportionate amount of time dealing with a handful of communities, which prevents us from working on things for the other 99.98% (literally) of Reddit. I'm off for now, thanks for your feedback. RIP my inbox.
top 200 commentsshow 500
sorted by:
q&a (suggested)
[–]Cheech5 3385 points3386 points3387 points  (7140 children)
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] 2838 points2839 points2840 points x14 (6971 children)
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 2719 points2720 points2721 points  (494 children)
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] 667 points668 points669 points  (437 children)
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.
[–]Warlizard 4633 points4634 points4635 points x16 (1277 children)
Last week an SRS user went nearly four years into my history and posted this in /r/ShitRedditSays:
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.
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:
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
EDIT: OMFG the staggering irony. An SRS mod is accusing me of organizing a brigade against them.
[–]AMarmot 942 points943 points944 points  (283 children)
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.
[–]TosieRose 184 points185 points186 points  (32 children)
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.
[–]AirPhforce 1466 points1467 points1468 points  (408 children)
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.)
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
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.
[–]Jonluw 58 points59 points60 points  (5 children)
The impression I got from your earlier posts was that subs like /r/coontown would be quarantined...
Did they do anything in particular to harass people or was it just that their content was too disgusting?
Edit: And I don't see how the new guidelines apply to animated CP. Care to explain the reasoning further than "we find it icky"?
[–]ANharper 708 points709 points710 points  (80 children)
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.
Edit: thanks for the gold, kind stranger.
[–]snorlz 917 points918 points919 points  (282 children)
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?
[–]Number357 3130 points3131 points3132 points x8 (1464 children)
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.
[–]Olive_Jane 733 points734 points735 points  (226 children)
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.
Can you speak on how exactly minors, or anybody, is being exploited or hurt by the content in subs like /r/lolicons?
[–]DillonPressStart 223 points224 points225 points  (29 children)
How do the Loli/shota subs break the content policy rules? They are not illegal by US laws, they are not involuntary, and those subs do not harass or brigade.
[–]jabberwockxeno 748 points749 points750 points  (240 children)
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.
[–]AvalonBright 58 points59 points60 points  (3 children)
Today we removed communities dedicated to animated CP
Given that lolicon art and Rule 34 isn't even illegal, it's pretty disingenuous to make it sound worse than it is by calling it "animated CP."
[–]brickmack 261 points262 points263 points  (30 children)
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 1569 points1570 points1571 points  (216 children)
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
[–]spez[S,A] 508 points509 points510 points  (165 children)
They receive a message, yes.
[–]booklover13 419 points420 points421 points  (105 children)
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] 63 points64 points65 points  (88 children)
The mods of a quarantined community are not banned, so they can message us just fine.
[–]dapht 259 points260 points261 points  (14 children)
/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 1973 points1974 points1975 points  (264 children)
Remember: "reddit" is always lowercase.
But your Content Policy spells it with a capital R, has this branding changed?
[–]spez[S,A] 1684 points1685 points1686 points  (249 children)
Yep, we're changing our style guide as well. It's a pain to start a sentence with reddit.
[–]bigblades 2427 points2428 points2429 points  (132 children)
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 1471 points1472 points1473 points  (19 children)
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
[–]Submitten 27 points28 points29 points  (2 children)
They came for our Jailbait and I said nothing, they came for our Fat people hate and I said nothing, then they came for our "r"s and there was no one to speak for me.
[–]BillW87 1600 points1601 points1602 points  (162 children)
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.
[–]dwchief 955 points956 points957 points  (119 children)
If a user is subscribed to a Quarantined subreddit, will it still appear on their front page?
[–]ChangloriousBastard 762 points763 points764 points  (268 children)
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] 263 points264 points265 points  (264 children)
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 860 points861 points862 points  (207 children)
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.
ETA:
/u/spez here is an example of SRS members writing rape threats to a redditor they dislike and a reddit mod (and former admin? intortus doing nothing about it EXCEPT banning the victim)
[–]CozyHeartPenguin 91 points92 points93 points  (6 children)
My first account was shadowbanned and despite a long period of time where I tried to find out why it had happened, so I could at least learn from whatever mistake I had made, I was ignored. It would be nice if there was at least a bot who could message us with a reason.
[–]zachlac 232 points233 points234 points  (79 children)
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] 45 points46 points47 points  (78 children)
Right now it's all we've got, but no, I don't think shadowbanning is appropriate beyond spam.
[–]btbrian 149 points150 points151 points  (11 children)
Just a heads up, it looks like you guys might have shadow-banned one or two of the senior game designers for Hearthstone. If the new strategy of Reddit is to "integrate noteworthy people into the Reddit community", it's probably best not to shadow-ban the noteworthy people who are known for being active in the reddit community.
[–]decimaster321 86 points87 points88 points  (1 child)
So, since the admins of the site that you run continue to use shadowbanning as a punishment for people who are not spamming the website, could you please list shadowbanning as one of the admin punishments in the code of conduct?
It doesn't really matter whether you think it's appropriate or not, frankly that's just diplomatic bullshit. It's a tool your employees regularly use against users who are not spamming the site. While it is used in this way, it should be listed in the code of conduct as one of the possible punishments.
[–]Xet 614 points615 points616 points  (307 children)
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] -571 points-570 points-569 points  (285 children)
No, because the mods of r/wtf are generally good about tagging things as NSFW.
[–]Xet 471 points472 points473 points  (219 children)
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] -606 points-605 points-604 points  (210 children)
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 713 points714 points715 points  (98 children)
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 209 points210 points211 points  (11 children)
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.
[–]321poof 26 points27 points28 points  (1 child)
for the record, you just admitted that the intent of these rules has nothing to do with harassment or brigading, that is the spin you are using to justify them, but you just admitted it is really an attempt to discourage the posting of, and limiting the access to, certain kinds of content that you subjectively find heinous. that is exactly the motive you are being accused of having, and you just plead guilty.
I dont visit any of the affected subreddits or post anything outside of r/futurology, but on principle, you are selling out, betraying the internet, and slowly strangling reddit to death. It's sad. If anybody knows a better place to discuss futurology, one that still stands for the principles of free and open communication that the future should be built upon, let me know.
[–]longshot2025 252 points253 points254 points  (20 children)
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 293 points294 points295 points  (12 children)
Well flagging cant be the true reason, all posts on /r/coontown were marked as NSFW.
[–]Shintao6 807 points808 points809 points  (688 children)
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?
[–]illegal_deagle 2365 points2366 points2367 points  (925 children)
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] -916 points-915 points-914 points  (757 children)
For the the time being we believe that brigading is best fought with technology, which we are actively working on.
[–]Synsc 853 points854 points855 points  (518 children)
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] -734 points-733 points-732 points  (492 children)
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 1381 points1382 points1383 points  (246 children)
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 731 points732 points733 points  (149 children)
Spez,
Help me out here please. In the content policy you define bullying as "Harassment on Reddit is defined as systematic and/or continued actions to torment or demean someone in a way that would make a reasonable person conclude that reddit is not a safe platform to express their ideas or participate in the conversation". I would say if someone is posted on SRS the sole purpose it shame and bully that person for the comments they are making (rightfully or not). I would say that fits under this definition does it not?
Also, was fatpeoplehate not banned for this exact behavior? We've seen SRS publish a list of usernames targeted at particular subreddits, wouldn't that also be a tool to help make this harassment and bullying easier?
I'm asking for clarification of the rules and how it appears at least they are not applied equally.
Thank you, Missmymom
[–]Didalectic 495 points496 points497 points  (21 children)
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 210 points211 points212 points  (5 children)
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 1215 points1216 points1217 points  (60 children)
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."
[–]raldi 529 points530 points531 points  (892 children)
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] -189 points-188 points-187 points  (731 children)
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 536 points537 points538 points  (520 children)
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] -660 points-659 points-658 points  (487 children)
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 1081 points1082 points1083 points  (260 children)
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] -727 points-726 points-725 points  (251 children)
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 220 points221 points222 points  (12 children)
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.
[–]cptnpiccard 228 points229 points230 points  (48 children)
"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.
[–]probably_quite_drunk 771 points772 points773 points  (65 children)
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.
[–]Eternal_Mr_Bones 24 points25 points26 points  (4 children)
Not to give you a hard time, but how does:
show enough respect to others so that we all may continue to enjoy reddit
Equate to:
CT's existence and popularity has also made recruiting here more difficult.
because we have to spend a disproportionate amount of time dealing with them.
I certainly understand the latter reasons for wanting to ban them if they are causing you trouble, but the former explanation doesn't really make sense.
[–][deleted]  (54 children)
[deleted]
    [–]relee1865 195 points196 points197 points  (9 children)
    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.
    [–][deleted]  (16 children)
    [deleted]
      [–]jonivy 83 points84 points85 points  (14 children)
      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.
      [–]JamisonP 126 points127 points128 points  (7 children)
      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.
      [–]SteelSaxon 90 points91 points92 points  (12 children)
      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?
      [–]fidsah 34 points35 points36 points  (2 children)
      So you banned /r/CoonTown for impacting your ability to recruit out of San Francisco, after firing all the employees who worked remotely, and now you're going to continue to ban subreddits who have done nothing but trifle with the feefees of the San Francisco tech community? Why not just delete every subreddit, and have the admins create the specific communities they don't have problems with, so that Reddit is one gaint hugbox, and ban everyone who disagrees with you, so that your recruitment numbers can go up?
      [–]fried_fetus 206 points207 points208 points  (18 children)
      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.
      [–]Teh_Compass 485 points486 points487 points  (520 children)
      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.
      [–]musicandwords 1125 points1126 points1127 points  (172 children)
      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.
      [–]pigeonburger 491 points492 points493 points  (32 children)
      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?
      [–]WhiteFlight2 678 points679 points680 points  (524 children)
      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?
      [–]Naked_Bacon_Tuesday 617 points618 points619 points  (15 children)
      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.
      [–]psuedopseudo 105 points106 points107 points  (1 child)
      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.
      [–]VulGerrity 168 points169 points170 points  (7 children)
      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.
      [–]Karunamon 206 points207 points208 points  (2 children)
      but the fact of the matter is we spend a disproportionate amount of time dealing with a handful of communities
      That ain't against the rules, bub. I'd expect you'd spend a "disproportionate amount of time dealing with a handful of communities" if those communities are controversial in any way. So can we add to the list of rules an unwritten one, "Don't annoy the admins?"
      Let's review.
      1. Earlier word gone back on about how specific places wouldn't be banned? Check. /u/spez, it's pretty simple here. You lied.
      2. SRS and their "network" still allowed to harass and brigade, despite the definition given here directly going against their entire reason for existing? Check.
      Here's a user in this very thread being harassed by SRS. What is the staff going to do about it? My money is on absolutely nothing, because that's what happens every time anyone gets harassed by SRS. Nothing.
      The double standard here could not possibly be more obvious.
      Reddit admins still remarkably opaque and dishonest? Check and check. Adblock back on, no more gold. I'd reconsidered that policy after you got hired and talked a big talk, but now I see that talk is all it is. Doubletalk and opacity, same as before.
      Thanks for re-destroying, possibly permanently, my faith that you guys have any idea what the hell you're doing and have a single Goddamned shred of honesty.
      [–]kochevnikov 441 points442 points443 points  (45 children)
      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 154 points155 points156 points  (10 children)
      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 360 points361 points362 points  (65 children)
      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.
      [–]Ionlyvayne 9 points10 points11 points  (0 children)
      It's bullshit. Clearly a target attack at the style of genre. Regular people don't accidentally stumble upon /r/Loli or /r/shota pomf or lolicon the people who view these know exactly what they are searching/looking for and the people who frequent there are not really the type to go out and try to shove their shit down your throat and harass other people. (Unlike srs, coontown etc...) someone with influence clearly just doesn't like FAKE drawn/animated characters. But whatever the investors want goes cause $$$$$$$ trumps all.
      [–]Treereme 27 points28 points29 points  (5 children)
      These are great points, I too would like to hear your answer.
      [–]Vhett 48 points49 points50 points  (4 children)
      He already gave an answer:
      spez [A] -309 points an hour ago
      They sexualize minors, which have been against our policies for a long time.
      Ridiculous. By that logic, go ban all Rule 34 subs, and any drawings of underage Disney characters who have been sexualized as well.
      [–]Raintrail 26 points27 points28 points  (1 child)
      And let's not forget, none of any r34 characters have consented to being drawn in sexually compromising situations.
      [–]pyrotactical99 3 points4 points5 points  (0 children)
      Also alot of of the anime "porn" and similar subs like /r/pantsu also seem to fall into onto the category of sexualizing minors to some degree, it seems so arbitrary in their way of hammering out the bans.
      [–]airborneleaf 86 points87 points88 points  (32 children)
      Because drawing kids in sexual ways is suuuuper evil or something.
      It's just Reddit trying to look better for the media, so expect more of this soon. Can't have all those disgusting, child-abducting pervert pedophiles hanging around here when this is where most media outlets get their stories.
      [–]Mononon 41 points42 points43 points  (30 children)
      Serious question, how the hell can you tell the age of someone in hentai? I mean, I'm sure there are obvious little kids, but other than the like 4-year old looking people, how in the world do you know how old they are? Unless they have a scarred up face or an eye-patch, they're anywhere from 10-35...
      [–]Pedosexuality 25 points26 points27 points  (16 children)
      Loli is more of a body type: petite and flat-chested girls. Sometimes drawn characters are from a visual novel or an anime or something similar where their age is told to the viewer.
      [–]Mononon 11 points12 points13 points  (4 children)
      What about the boy version? I've never known the age of an anime male unless they specifically told me.
      [–]LukeTheFisher 14 points15 points16 points  (3 children)
      Stop watching all that Boku No Dicko and you're safe.
      [–]Mononon 12 points13 points14 points  (2 children)
      I'm gay and I like twinks. I've also seen yaoi. I don't think it's a stretch to assume some of the guys in those comics were meant to be a certain age. I just don't understand how the intended age of a cartoon matters here...
      [–]doctorstrange06 11 points12 points13 points  (0 children)
      It doesnt, and it wont stop here. Wait until one of the higher ups decides that porn on reddit looks bad.
      [–]airborneleaf 28 points29 points30 points  (8 children)
      I don't know, I don't have anything to do with hentai. I just know that it's a retarded decision to ban subreddits related to it, even if there's art of a small child being raped in the ass by a creepy old man.
      What damage is it doing besides making Reddit look bad to the media and advertisers (not that either of those are important)? None.
      [–]Mononon 24 points25 points26 points  (7 children)
      It does seem odd to ban based on content rather than intent. I thought the point was to ban based on the subreddit's intent to be antagonistic. The hentai subreddits weren't doing either those things and aren't illegal where they're hosted. I guess I just don't understand the policy here. It seems arbitrary at best. Why cartoon porn over other things?
      [–]airborneleaf 32 points33 points34 points  (6 children)
      Oh you understand what the policy was supposed to be. They just lied and got rid of whatever they don't like.
      [–]Mononon 7 points8 points9 points  (4 children)
      Fair enough. I thought I missed something. I wasn't seeing any correlation between this post and loli and shota. I guess it is as random as it seems.
      [–]airborneleaf 20 points21 points22 points  (3 children)
      Actually we need to ban /r/yiff too. Can you imagine the mental torment all those fictional anthropomorphic animals must go through when they find out their pictures were leaked online?
      [–]lizab-FA 15 points16 points17 points  (2 children)
      If anything /r/babyfurs should be banned too, its mostly drawings of younger furries
      [–]board124 6 points7 points8 points  (0 children)
      how the hell can you tell the age of someone in hentai?
      This makes me wonder about a place like yuri where most of the subject seems to be younger looking girls. Sort of surprised it did not get taken with the rest of them.
      [–]itsIzumi 15 points16 points17 points  (0 children)
      Seriously /u/spez, why is /r/CandidFashionPolice still up and why do you and every other admin seem to ignore this question despite it being asked in every /r/announcements post?
      [–]cainejw 28 points29 points30 points  (2 children)
      "We will Quarantine communities whose content would be considered extremely offensive to the average redditor."
      Who is this average redditor? What are their demographics? What are their political beliefs? What are their religious backgrounds? Does this mean if the average redditor becomes someone with racist views, these will be allowed because they're the average redditor?
      Frankly, this is horribly vague and lends itself to easy abuse in the interpretation. You've not defined, at all, who this magical redditor is /u/spez. You've just said that you'll dictate the entire policy on their views.
      What this should likely read is "We will quarantine communities whose content would be considered extremely offensive to the moderator." There's no need to mix the message that you have any information whatsoever on the demographics of the average user of this site with any degree of confidence.
      And I have to say that I have little to no faith that you and your buddies will shy from abusing your station to promote ideological purity and reddit as a "safe space."
      Sincerely, a gay liberal social worker who thinks that this sounds incredibly totalitarian for a website that pretends to build itself on populism.
      [–]WyMANderly 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
      Yeah, this policy is incredibly vague, poorly worded, and all-around problematic. It's hard to believe it was the result of weeks of refinement... dammit guys/gals, just say what you mean and quit the doublespeak. We're all tired of it.
      Sincerely, a sleepy conservative engineer who finds your management philosophy highly suspect.
      [–]Mordeth 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
      "We will Quarantine communities whose content would be considered extremely offensive to the average redditor."
      They really mean, "whose content would be considered unappetizing to current or potential advertisers". If you look at it that way it makes much more sense to leave subreddits like SRS around, since they will make this place toxic for 'deviants'.
      [–]Olive_Jane 293 points294 points295 points  (55 children)
      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.
      Can you speak on how exactly minors, or anybody, is being exploited or hurt by the content in subs like /r/lolicons?
      [–]fubo 15 points16 points17 points  (0 children)
      The current stated policy isn't even coherent; it will probably be changed:
      What is involuntary pornography?
      Photographs, videos, or digital images of you in a state of nudity or engaged in any act of sexual conduct, taken without your permission. This includes child sexual abuse imagery, which we will report to authorities, content that encourages or promotes pedophilia or sexual imagery–including animated content–that involves individuals under the age of 18.
      The first sentence fragment of this answer attempts to define the term "involuntary pornography": "Photographs, videos, or digital images of you in a state of nudity or engaged in any act of sexual conduct, taken without your permission." This is offered as an answer to the question, "What is involuntary pornography?"
      This is very similar to Google's takedown policy on "revenge porn", which covers "nude or sexually explicit images that were uploaded or shared without your consent."
      Let's assume everyone agrees with that definition. I certainly do, and it seems to pretty much be the consensus for major sites these days.
      The problem is the next sentence (emphasis added):
      This includes child sexual abuse imagery, which we will report to authorities, content that encourages or promotes pedophilia or sexual imagery–including animated content–that involves individuals under the age of 18.
      But as a matter of actual fact, some of those things don't fit the definition given in the first fragment; and this makes the whole paragraph incoherent.
      As it stands, the policy has the same logical structure as:
      What is murder?
      The deliberate, unlawful killing of a human being. This includes cutting the head off of a living or dead person, cutting their toes off, or praying to God — even to a pretend god you just made up — that they have a heart attack.
      The initial definition is correct, but the rest is a mess.
      [–]deathfantasy 79 points80 points81 points  (4 children)
      I'd say that lolicon subreddits were banned solely for PR reasons. There has also been a significant push to ban lolicon from European countries, which might also explain the ban.
      [–]Olive_Jane 29 points30 points31 points  (1 child)
      I fear you are right, which is why I'm voicing my concerns here. I think its worrisome the direction reddit is taking.
      [–]donkey_democrat 5 points6 points7 points  (0 children)
      The direction is clear, how far we are pushed is the question, and the wheels have already started rolling. Go to voat.
      [–]SaiHottari 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
      Canada has it (hentai depicting minors) banned and labeled as actual CP, has for some time now.
      [–]Etonet 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
      All of this is for PR reasons
      [–]DillonPressStart 76 points77 points78 points  (10 children)
      It's not but /u/spez figures he can get away with it since very few people will publically defend it
      [–]Olive_Jane 75 points76 points77 points  (5 children)
      My main goal isn't to defend this particular content, it's to defend fiction or works of art from being banned or labeled immoral.
      I did feel a little weird about making the comments I've made, because it would be so easy for someone to cast them in a negative light, however I believe in what I'm saying. I am trying to argue for free speech and for a policy on reddit.com that I agree with.
      [–]poke2201 38 points39 points40 points  (0 children)
      I agree with this too. I'm not really okay with banning drawings for any reason. But because its tied to CP, the pedophile complainers probably will cheer.
      [–]SpoopyDerper 5 points6 points7 points  (1 child)
      The real issue here is that this isn't even mainly about Animated Child Pornography, and thus about the question of how far artistic liberty may go, it's actually about the fact that this is – without exaggeration – a first step in the direction of signing into law the concept of "thought crimes", which is absolutely and utterly unacceptable in a free society.
      What doesn't harm may never be outlawed, or else it's simply abritrariness on the lawmaker's side.
      This well-known quote is, here again, very relevant to that situation:
      First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
      [–]SocialistJW -2 points-1 points0 points  (0 children)
      Where is the verse about not speaking out because you were too busy jerking off to pictures of underage titties
      [–]DillonPressStart 26 points27 points28 points  (0 children)
      As an artist (writer) I totally understand where you are coming from and I agree.
      [–]Anaphylatic 12 points13 points14 points  (0 children)
      "A bastion of free speech on the World Wide Web? I bet they would like it"
      - Reddit Co-Founder Alexis Ohanian
      [–]snorlz 9 points10 points11 points  (1 child)
      yeah ive never gone to any of the banned subs but im pissed because its really obvious they are not at all consistent with banning. ive gotten a bunch of comments telling me im a pedophile for saying that those subs shouldnt have been banned
      Also the idea that a drawing can be a victim is horseshit. Drawing a horse dick is literally bestiality according to reddit.
      [–]DillonPressStart 4 points5 points6 points  (0 children)
      See, I don't care about vitriolic racist subs getting banned but this is a different beast. I made the point that without Reddit's moderation standards, people who used to safely get their urges out of their system by looking at Loli/shota, may be exposed to real live CP if it continues to be demonized and shunned to the dark corners of the internet.
      [–]dallasdarling 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
      Jokes on him, this is reddit. Half of this thread is in opposition to the lolicon ban, even though probably few consume it.
      [–]SocialistJW 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
      Are you kidding? Look at all the sick fucks oozing out of the woodwork.
      [–]infinitum17 35 points36 points37 points  (13 children)
      Wasn't there research that showed that pedophiles who used CP to deal with their urges were far less likely to abuse real children?
      [–]Alpine_Stranger 16 points17 points18 points  (2 children)
      Talking about "urges" like that makes pedophiles sound like vampires. No one talks about "urges" to wank to Stoya or Gianna Michaels. It's just what lets them get off.
      If this is about pedophiles in the mental disorder sense, what about the non-pedophiles who just happen to find cute girls with flat chests sexually attractive?
      [–]alex_wifiguy 12 points13 points14 points  (1 child)
      This is the first sub they have banned that I regularly visits. I don't have urges to do anything with minors just like I don't have urges to fuck a giant tentacle monster. It's a drawing for fucks sake. The majority of people on here watch porn of stuff they would never want to do in real life, it's fantasy.
      [–]CrystalElyse 5 points6 points7 points  (1 child)
      There's also research proving that it makes them more likely to act on their urges. It's completely inconclusive, there aren't enough studies to find an actual link, and it's really hard to find people willing to participate in the study.
      It boils down to "no one knows."
      [–]ABastionOfFreeSpeech 5 points6 points7 points  (0 children)
      There's also studies that prove that violent videogames make people more likely to commit violent acts. Studies are useless unless they are performed correctly, with as much elimination of bias as possible, and unfortunately there isn't a soul out there that would step up for a study that's attempting to prove the opposite of your hypothesis, as pedophiles are considered the worst monsters ever in common society, and to announce yourself as one is to commit social suicide.
      [–]Nyxisto -13 points-12 points-11 points  (6 children)
      No, several studies have shown a strong link between CP and child abuse.
      This study for example came to the conclusion that there is a significant correlation between CP consumption and recidivism regarding sexual offenders.
      [–]Ansoni 8 points9 points10 points  (3 children)
      Breaking news, those who like a certain type of sex watch that same time of porn! Stay tuned to find out how we proved gay porn was a risk factor for homosexuality.
      [–]Nyxisto -4 points-3 points-2 points  (2 children)
      That's not the result of the study at all. What it showed was that child offenders who consumed CP were more likely to commit crimes again after they were released compared to a group of former sexual offenders who did not consume CP.
      "Most importantly, after controlling for general and specific risk factors for sexual aggression, pornography added significantly to the prediction of recidivism. Statistical interactions indicated that frequency of pornography use was primarily a risk factor for higher-risk offenders, when compared with lower-risk offenders, and that content of pornography (i.e., pornography containing deviant content) was a risk factor for all groups"
      [–]Ansoni 3 points4 points5 points  (1 child)
      Yes, I know. And how does this dismiss my dismission?
      Take the homosexuality example. If I saw that someone watched a lot of gay porn with big guys, I would guess they were gay and liked big guys. It doesn't mean that watching gay porn with big guys turned them into that kind of person.
      Now, it's important to say I'm not denying it's possible that watching loli could influence someone, but correlation in this is entirely expected and doesn't prove anything.
      [–]Nyxisto -5 points-4 points-3 points  (0 children)
      because it's not just "pedophiles are more likely to watch CP, because they're pedophiles" which is completely obvious, the important part is that you have two groups of sexual offenders, and that CP increased the likelihood of recidivism.
      For this to be only by chance it would mean that people who watch CP are inherently more violent, or predatory, which is a strange assumption to say the least.
      [–]slimabob 2 points3 points4 points  (1 child)
      Correlation =/= causation.
      [–]Nyxisto -5 points-4 points-3 points  (0 children)
      Contrary to what you might believe that is not a valid argument to disregard empirical research.
      [–]minecraft_ece 4 points5 points6 points  (0 children)
      Can you speak on how exactly minors, or anybody, is being exploited or hurt by the content in subs like /r/lolicons[2] ?
      Reddit Investors are being hurt by not getting sufficient return on their investment. I believe that /u/spaz or another admin has already stated that "free speech" is no longer a priority here.
      [–]tollie 53 points54 points55 points  (1 child)
      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 feel like the community should be involved more (perhaps through email-registered, or IP limited voting?), and the process should be more open.
      [–]EconMan 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
      That language seems really broad and I'm concerned that it leaves the process a bit too opaque.
      Well, it's funny that he releases this whole new content policy, then proceeds to ban a bunch of subs that seemingly don't break any of the guidelines at all. All he can say is "they make Reddit worse". Why isn't that in the guidelines themselves then?
      [–]Facerless 237 points238 points239 points  (17 children)
      • 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?
      [–]mishiesings 7 points8 points9 points  (0 children)
      Just as devils advocate, what grey area are you assuming there is. Like what example of a sub or situation would fall technically within those bounds, but you dont feel spiritually meets them.
      [–]apalehorse 75 points76 points77 points  (2 children)
      You're not nit picking. You're correctly pointing out that these words are meaningless and the admins haven't clarified anything like they promised to do. "Bullying" is just an abstract term that means "saying something that I disagree with about someone I empathize with."
      [–]Toraden 6 points7 points8 points  (0 children)
      Hey I don't agree with you! Stop bullying me!
      [–]afkd 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
      Bullying is not an abstract term. It has a defined meaning.
      There is even a whole Wikipedia page dedicated to it in case you need an explanation of the behavior.
      [–]isiramteal 3 points4 points5 points  (0 children)
      encourages others to do so
      Isn't this kind of subjective? If I can easily say that this sub is encouraging me to bully and harass people, will announcements be banned?
      [–]DeafOnion 21 points22 points23 points  (5 children)
      Say what you say about them, but coontown had a strict policy against calling for violence.They also never went on harassing brigades.
      So basically if spez doesn't like you,you're gone.
      I wonder if Lolicons would have been deleted if spez was a lolicon himself...
      [–]CuilRunnings 23 points24 points25 points  (0 children)
      I wonder if Lolicons would have been deleted if spez was a lolicon himself...
      Really makes you wonder why the animal porn subreddits didn't get banned.
      [–]geeky_username[🍰] 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
      And which part of the sub counts as inciting violence, the links or the comments?
      /r/Bad_Cop_No_Donut doesn't incite violence as policy, but a LARGE majority of the comments there call for the killing of police officers with every story
      [–]Level100ProtWarrior 8 points9 points10 points  (1 child)
      Hah. Funny. They didn't call for violence, they just celebrated when it was carried out against others.
      [–]pastanazgul 3 points4 points5 points  (0 children)
      Which isn't banned under the new policy, which was the point I belive the poster you were replying to was trying to make.
      [–]DownbeatWings 4 points5 points6 points  (0 children)
      I highly doubt that spez makes the decisions completely alone.
      And the racists assholes can always flock to that other shithole sub that got put under quarantine.
      [–]GBACHO 3 points4 points5 points  (0 children)
      So what's going to happen to /r/politics?
      [–]donkey_democrat 4 points5 points6 points  (0 children)
      Don't expect an answer. It's purposely vague, because the enforcement is political in nature.
      [–]Death_To_Dem_Homos 2 points3 points4 points  (1 child)
      How does porn fall under those rules? Fuck you admins!
      [–]chisayne 4 points5 points6 points  (0 children)
      You're bullying your poor penis.
      [–]donkey_democrat 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
      Lol of course not. It's political in nature, not just based on the literal term "hate"
      [–]Bohemos 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
      I can't wait for this to backfire... And holy shit it's so obvious it's going to backfire.
      They'll ban coontown and nobody but coontown and free speech advocates will care.
      Then they'll ban another tomorrow, and a few more will care
      And then another, and maybe we'll notice
      And then they'll ban just the right one, the powder keg. And everyone will have themselves to blame.
      [–]Vittles_And_Libation 404 points405 points406 points  (31 children)
      "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:
      [–]EldarCorsair 176 points177 points178 points  (20 children)
      Let's not forget this post
      /r/coontown will be reclassified. The content there is offensive to many, but does not violate our current rules for banning.
      [–]WiWiWiWiWiWi 8 points9 points10 points  (0 children)
      It's pretty clear there's an agenda when a sub follows the rules so well that the admins have to change the rules so they can ban it without warning.
      [–]dardanmm 32 points33 points34 points  (0 children)
      "current" rules tho That's why you make new ones and ban w/e you want amiright
      [–]xoiz 43 points44 points45 points  (12 children)
      /r/CoonTown was so powerful admins had to change rules for them. I think they're already cheering it on voat.
      [–]Jellysound 19 points20 points21 points  (11 children)
      They are, I didn't know what a coontown was so I googled it and voat was like the fourth entry
      [–]OnionNo 14 points15 points16 points  (10 children)
      I hope Voat's gonna be alright with these big influxes. Not server load wise, just at this point you have angry people that are angry that their anger board got shut down.
      [–]rhllor 12 points13 points14 points  (3 children)
      If communities like CoonTown and FatPeopleHate and I dunno maybe even RapingWomen and jailbait are moving to Voat, is the site now /b/ that looks like reddit?
      [–]Redneb27 7 points8 points9 points  (1 child)
      It's actually not. All they do is talk about Reddit over there right now. Like someone who won't shut up about their ex.
      [–]OnionNo 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
      Haha, yeah, that is kind of the vibe I've gotten from the place so far. There's definitely an attempt by the community to forge its own identity, but these influxes seem to undermine that effort.
      [–]flyingwolf 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
      Voat deleted the jailbait sub.
      [–]i_killed_hitler 7 points8 points9 points  (1 child)
      angry people that are angry that their anger board got shut down.
      Fairly 90-98% of most banned communities were just trolling for fun, not angry.
      [–]alex_wifiguy 4 points5 points6 points  (0 children)
      I am the 2% what am I going to jack off to now?
      [–]cybervalidation -5 points-4 points-3 points  (0 children)
      I made a coat account out of curiosity, I've been checking in less and less frequently because of the lack of content I am personally interested in and the amount of power FPH have on subverses such as /v/news. I wouldn't quite go as far to say it's a shithole yet, but it is on it's way, and today won't help. I wouldn't be surprised if the only trending topics there tomorrow are about a fat guy getting kicked off a plane, a black guy getting shot, and a "reddit admins are literally Hitler" thread.
      [–]Jellysound -9 points-8 points-7 points  (2 children)
      I'm still not 100% clear on what voat or coontown is (I'd prefer to be kept in the dark these context clues are terrifying)
      [–]Eltargrim 3 points4 points5 points  (1 child)
      Voat is just a Reddit clone, for better or for worse.
      [–]NeedsLoomis 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
      Neat, gonna go check that out
      [–]bonnella 8 points9 points10 points  (0 children)
      seriously how the fuck are people not talking about this shit enough with the double talk and fuckin lying mate this shit is fucking embarrassing for them lmao
      [–]donkey_democrat 8 points9 points10 points  (2 children)
      It's because coontown mods enforced "anti-harassment" too well. They needed to bend the rules yet again to ban them.
      [–]Throwawayforctown 8 points9 points10 points  (1 child)
      They just flat out banned us. Really there were no rules broken.
      [–]Mynameisnotdoug -1 points0 points1 point  (0 children)
      You should probably just enjoy voat. I think all parties in this situation are happier that way anyway.
      [–]tequilaandsunshine -3 points-2 points-1 points  (0 children)
      Let's also not forget that in that comment, spez was trying to give answers and examples to a userbase that was absolutely clamoring for them. Corporations are not made of one person's ideas and reddit would be pretty pissed if spez ran Reddit like a monarchy. By ripping admins apart every time they're inconsistent, you pretty much guarantee they'll be less open as the process is still going on the next time they start making changes. You want answers as things develop? Stop being pissed that they're not the same as the final answers.
      [–]Bohemos 4 points5 points6 points  (0 children)
      It's funny to those of us who called this exactly.
      Call us conspiracy theorists or tin foil hat folks... But we called it weeks ago that it was censorship and had nothing to do with actions.
      Coontown was full of totally ignorant and stupid idiots.... Full to the brim!! But they ran the sub according to the rules, and still got banned even after it was said they wouldn't be.
      The coming year is going to be hilarious to watch as more and more occurs and less and less you are allowed to talk about.
      [–]shodanx 5 points6 points7 points  (0 children)
      Agahag, that's cute you believed that.
      [–]Grzechooo 35 points36 points37 points  (0 children)
      spez talking out of his ass as always
      [–]somebodylies 6 points7 points8 points  (0 children)
      If there's anything you could learn from past few months it's just that, never trust corporate pimps.
      [–]Safety_Dancer 3 points4 points5 points  (0 children)
      Either spez is as dominated by the wind as the average leaf or he's a liar.
      [–]BlindManSight 1 point2 points3 points  (3 children)
      "... we've always banned hate speech, and we always will. It's not up for debate. You can bitch and moan all you like, but me and my team aren't going to be responsible for encouraging behaviors that lead to hate."
      Permalink:
      [–]brikad 21 points22 points23 points  (1 child)
      "encouraging behaviors that lead to hate."
      What's this guy on? Redditors aren't goddamn five year olds you can entice with candy. The people visiting those subreddits are already racist. You don't click /r/coontown and suddenly become overwhelmed with hatred for black people.
      Seriously, this is some Reefer Madness-level stupidity.
      [–]Mertex 7 points8 points9 points  (0 children)
      It's like we're taking crazy pills. Everything is so ass backwards
      [–]EconMan 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
      Wow. THAT is interesting. No idea why no one has dug out that quote from before.
      [–]The_Adventurist 297 points298 points299 points  (15 children)
      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.
      [–]JonnyHall 6 points7 points8 points  (2 children)
      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?
      Holy shit that is the trump card. These idiots now have to be the morality police -- that will lead to untold mayhem because as you say, anything not removed is essentially endorsed by reddit and its board of directors.
      Good luck guys! Its probably better to try and monetize the assholes and offensive jerks than to try and kick them out -- you have seen how many are on the internet, right?
      If jerks are no longer welcome on reddit, yea, it'll be a nice place -- but your user base is now halved.
      [–]penis_in_my_hand 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
      halved? all reddit users are jerks. it's going to be decimated
      [–]iwbtg 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
      I imagined your voice to be very far away, yelling in a sort of hurricane.
      [–]xteliminator 31 points32 points33 points  (1 child)
      Oh my god you just said it perfectly. I was happy to ignore the shit seeping under the surface. Now its puking forth like a septic field backup.
      [–]a_way_finds_life 12 points13 points14 points  (0 children)
      Yes, /u/The_Adventurist said it perfectly. I didn't even know about any of this garbage until people decided to start policing it with a hypocrisy so heavy-handed it might as well be wearing a fucking gauntlet. SRS was always worse and scarier than the racist subreddits I knew fuckall about. But I guess all of their doxxing and vote-brigading can be fixed with "technology" (wtf does that even mean...). Feels First and Foremost. This has only helped the CoonTowners. Check out their voat, if you're extra bored. Something like 10k people active there right now. Great job, reddit. ಠ_ಠ
      [–]PaXProSe 8 points9 points10 points  (5 children)
      Its gone now (10 minutes after you posted)
      [–]The_Adventurist 23 points24 points25 points  (2 children)
      Point still stands. Once you start deeming what is and is not officially reddit approved, anything I read on reddit from now on carries the implicit approval of reddit leadership. That's the problem with getting your hands dirty with content policing (as long as the content isn't illegal).
      [–]PaXProSe 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
      I was keeping a timestamp because your post was interesting.
      Im pretty impartial either way. I didn't do anything to build reddit, nor am I contributing to its demise.
      I'm sitting on the porch both literally and figuratively.
      [–]Manos_Of_Fate -4 points-3 points-2 points  (0 children)
      In my opinion, there's a difference between "they haven't quite definitively crossed that line yet" and "we endorse this". Reddit has lots of communities that they wouldn't want to actually endorse, but don't cross the line into ban worthiness.
      [–]Theothor 4 points5 points6 points  (1 child)
      It's not, it's in quarantine.
      [–]goy_protein_isolate 6 points7 points8 points  (0 children)
      And I can't view it on mobile. Where else am I going to learn about how the kikes are fucking over the White man?
      [–]iambecomedownvote 10 points11 points12 points  (0 children)
      We predicted this as soon as they banned jailbait.
      [–]Furkhail 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
      Maybe I'm just being the devil's advocate but not arresting someone that is doing something illegal is not the same as saying that it is legal. Right? right? anyone? Ok :_(
      Not saying that the policy is right, btw
      [–]starducks -3 points-2 points-1 points  (1 child)
      Not really. Just because something isn't banned yet, doesn't mean it wont be. It doesn't mean reddit approves at all.
      [–]el_muerte17 7 points8 points9 points  (0 children)
      SRS is never going to get banned...
      [–]Mobre 299 points300 points301 points  (16 children)
      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.
      [–]GreyWalker 71 points72 points73 points  (8 children)
      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.
      That is from the reddit page about quarantines. It is blatant that is up to the admins to ban whatever they feel like.
      [–]tequila13 59 points60 points61 points  (1 child)
      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 or to our advertisers.
      This is what they really meant. Redditors always had a choice to unsub from subs they didn't like. Reddit grew just fine without this quarantine BS.
      [–]riversofgore 5 points6 points7 points  (0 children)
      This is the admins talking out the side of their mouth. Corporate speak for making reddit more palatable to advertisers.
      [–]Jellysound 4 points5 points6 points  (0 children)
      More like ban whatever they don't like.
      [–]edphone 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
      well when reddit actually does get some advertisement let those advertiser's know that as long as they advertise on Reddit we won't bother to buy their products
      [–]BlackBlarneyStone -3 points-2 points-1 points  (0 children)
      well at least they're honest
      [–]lazydictionary comment score below threshold-8 points-7 points-6 points  (2 children)
      ...its their website.
      [–]ChaosRulesForever 4 points5 points6 points  (1 child)
      No, it is our website.
      Without the users and the mods reddit would not exist.
      [–]lazydictionary -4 points-3 points-2 points  (0 children)
      The community makes reddit what it is. It's not our website. They make the rules. Transparency and a little democracy is just a nice.bonus.
      [–]BlackBlarneyStone 5 points6 points7 points  (0 children)
      /r/enoughlibertarianspam is still there. that place exists solely to annoy libertarians. they straight-up accuse L's of being pedos, rapists, etc, posts about how all L's should be drowned...
      but its still there.
      [–]TheRealCorngood 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
      To me these rules actually make sense, and the overlap isn't a problem. However, in this case the interpretation of the rules is totally wrong, which seeing that they just wrote them, must be intentional.
      If these were laws, and there was a court, almost all of these bans would be reversed.
      [–]mn920 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
      Bizarrely, it seems easier to ban a sub under these standards than it is to quarantine one.
      [–]rickdg 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
      Seems like a way to stop a community from deliberately being offensive to get quarantined, as they risk getting banned instead.
      [–]Reddisaurusrekts 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
      It's intentionally arbitrary - it means they can do what they want, anything they want, and find some post hoc reason for it.
      [–]thiagovscoelho -1 points0 points1 point  (0 children)
      great point
      [–]gigabyte898 86 points87 points88 points  (8 children)
      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
      [–]CarmineCerise 415 points416 points417 points  (192 children)
      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?
      [–]Der_Process 459 points460 points461 points  (75 children)
      From the list of what they gave and what /u/spez said about banning animated CP i checked around. Some of those ones may have been banned a little before this but most likely most are from this wave.
      Will update.
      Current list of known banned subs:
      also this is mildly funny to me and worth pointing out
      Remember that sub /r/blackfathers that people always link to as a bad joke because the sub is intentionally empty? It got quarantined.
      [–]Heelincal 177 points178 points179 points  (8 children)
      /r/blackfathers got quarantined? Lol are you serious?
      [–]SikhAndDestroy 220 points221 points222 points  (3 children)
      > joke sub that depends on misdirection
      > adding more misdirection
      > joke sub with no content
      > quarantined for shocking/offensive content
      Has anyone seen my toucan?
      [–]lettherebedwight 45 points46 points47 points  (2 children)
      They probably just made it funnier for anybody who's new to the joke.
      [–]chisayne 4 points5 points6 points  (0 children)
      On mobile, 404 not found. That seems to fit the sub's goal just fine.
      [–]DontEatTheDaisies 18 points19 points20 points  (0 children)
      Can confirm, new to the joke
      [–]funkeepickle 10 points11 points12 points  (0 children)
      Lame jokes are serious business. Just think, what if somebody got triggered?
      [–]TheMuffnMan 7 points8 points9 points  (0 children)
      It's my favorite sub :(
      [–]orange_jooze 120 points121 points122 points  (38 children)
      This is confusing. The first half I get, but the second is just someone on the admin team being prudish.
      [–]Der_Process 102 points103 points104 points  (8 children)
      To be fair that content is illegal in a few countries, but then again so is drawing Mohammed
      [–]orange_jooze 76 points77 points78 points  (2 children)
      Well, then just let those countries block those sites. They can do that. My country even banned Pastebin.
      [–]Cryzgnik 2 points3 points4 points  (1 child)
      Why pastebin?
      [–]orange_jooze 4 points5 points6 points  (0 children)
      The people who create those lists are far from tech-savvy. Someone submits a report saying that there's a document on Pastebin that promotes extremism or whatever. The whole site gets added to the "Advisory list". From there, all internet providers are obligated to add those sites to their blacklist. The issue is that later on, someone will challenge the (obviously stupid) ruling and the website is removed from the list, but the providers don't remove it from their list. It's all pretty stupid - they've got stuff on that list like "file named deathtoinfidels.txt". So you could have a text file like that, full of Beatles lyrics and they'd still technically have grounds to charge you with possession of extremist material.
      [–]BeepBoopRobo 43 points44 points45 points  (2 children)
      But the rules of reddit state that it's fine as long as it is legal in the US. Which it is.
      [–]candycaneforestelf -4 points-3 points-2 points  (1 child)
      That's dependent on the state you're in.
      [–]BeepBoopRobo 16 points17 points18 points  (0 children)
      It was ruled legal by the US supreme court - so legal in the US. So far as I'm aware, reddit does not adhere to local/state law in this regard.
      [–]chisayne 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
      So is that the reason behind /r/drawpeople?
      [–]roflocalypselol 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
      Don't give them any ideas.
      [–]the_honest_liar 6 points7 points8 points  (4 children)
      Not sure I want to ask, and certainly don't want to Google, but... What is coontown?
      [–]lazydictionary 7 points8 points9 points  (1 child)
      White supremacists or at least people who don't like black people.
      [–]FighterPoetThinker 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
      don't like black people
      That's gotta be the understatement of the day.
      [–]GreenTheOlive 5 points6 points7 points  (0 children)
      Like /r/fatpeoplehate but for black people.
      [–]1sagas1 9 points10 points11 points  (0 children)
      A racist shithole
      [–]riversofgore 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
      How does a subreddit annoy someone? This is just banning racist subs and calling it something else. Majority of people don't like those subs so they agree with it.
      [–]Kinglink 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
      yes.
      [–]DragonPup -3 points-2 points-1 points  (3 children)
      Animated CP is a weird legal issue. While it's not CP cause there's no victim, it can still be obscenity.
      [–]Cowboy_Jesus 15 points16 points17 points  (2 children)
      By U.S. law it is legal though, so...
      [–]DragonPup -4 points-3 points-2 points  (1 child)
      Yes and no. It's not CP this is true, but it can still run afoul with obscenity laws.
      [–]Emiliak 3 points4 points5 points  (0 children)
      An asshole in gonewild is obscene.
      [–]Jess_than_three -14 points-13 points-12 points  (13 children)
      "We don't want simulated child pornography on our site" == prudishness. Never change, reddit.
      [–]IDe- 15 points16 points17 points  (6 children)
      What is the moral imperative you want to enforce here? Animated/simulated crimes should be illegal? That should logically lead to banning of /r/gta.
      [–]Jess_than_three comment score below threshold-14 points-13 points-12 points  (5 children)
      Hooray for red herrings! A person not trying to defend kiddie porn might easily recognize that I said nothing about legality - neither current nor ideal - nor did I ask for anything to be enforced (though I certainly do applaud the admins' decision!). All I did do was to take the position that it's deeply questionable to make the claim that choosing not to provide a platform for said (yes, legal) kiddie porn makes the admins, to quote Wiktionary,
      [people] who [are] or [try] to be excessively proper, especially one[s] who [are] easily offended by matters of a sexual nature.
      But hey, keep making shit up to attack people in order to try to defend your right to jerk off to simulated child rape, okay? I'm sure that if you keep at it, you'll win out in the end!
      [–]FlyingRep 6 points7 points8 points  (1 child)
      Holy fuck dude.
      NO CRIME IS COMITTED. It is LITERALLY the exact same of art killing people.
      Killing people is a crime, drawing or liking art of people killing people or you killing people (literally any fps ever) isnt a crime. Its a simulated crime.
      Same thing with what you called cp. Its art, no crime was comitted, just a simulated crime by you or someone else. IT IS THE EXACT SAME EXCEPT THEY ARE DOING A DIFFERENT CRIME
      [–]Jess_than_three 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
      You really can't read at all, can you? Not once but twice (and one of those times right in the second sentence!) did I explicitly note that I wasn't saying anything whatsoever about legality! Fuuuuck you guys are dumb.
      [–]MrPewp 2 points3 points4 points  (2 children)
      You try to make the argument that he's making a logical fallacy, yet make several of your own. By using your logic, I can safely dismiss your opinion and include an hyperbolic ad hominem for good measure.
      You're an idiot and your argument is bad.
      [–]Jess_than_three 0 points1 point2 points  (1 child)
      LOL, what? I'm genuinely curious what you see as fallacious in saying that not wanting to host a forum for depictions of child rape doesn't make someone a prude.
      Also, that's not what ad hominem is: ad hominem isn't "you're a dumbass and your argument is wrong", it's "you're a dumbass, therefore your argument is wrong". You dumbass.
      [–]MrPewp 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
      I know this is low hanging fruit, but I'll bite.
      He never mentioned that he found drawn depictions of sex arousing. He was merely arguing against your faulty reasoning. From his simple reply, you accused him of being a pedophile, and that his main motive is his desire to masturbate to these (legal, mind you) images.
      That ending portion of your pseudo-intelligent snarky little rant is an attack on his character, and seeks to undermine his argument through it. That's an ad hominem, kiddo.
      Once again, you're an idiot and your argument is bad.
      [–]orange_jooze 4 points5 points6 points  (5 children)
      Then what is it? It's prudish to imply that banning this sort of content is preventing abuse or something like that. It's just the staff being overly moralistic while trying to prevent another /r/jailbait scenario. I'd be okay with it if they at least tried to explain it properly - and maybe do it on a separate occasion instead of trying to push this through while everyone's busy discussing CT (just to be clear - I'm extremely happy that the "chimpire" is finally being brought down) and shitposting about le SRS.
      [–]Jess_than_three -10 points-9 points-8 points  (4 children)
      "Prudish" and "moralistic" are not synonyms. But feel free to keep denigrating people who aren't okay with kiddie porn.
      [–]orange_jooze 5 points6 points7 points  (3 children)
      But it's not kiddie porn by definition. It's drawn. It doesn't exploit anyone. Don't let your emotions cloud your judgement.
      [–]Jess_than_three comment score below threshold-9 points-8 points-7 points  (2 children)
      Is it porn? Yes. Are the subjects kids? Yes. Look, I'm not trying to tell anyone what to or not to jerk it to within the realm of things that did not in the process of their creation cause anyone or anything to come to harm, but it is what it is, it's fucking repugnant regardless, and trying to brand people who aren't okay with providing a platform for it as prudes (a shaming argument) is intellectually dishonest in the extreme.
      [–]FlyingRep 1 point2 points3 points  (1 child)
      Killing people is frowned upon, and also illegal and immoral, so why dont you hate literally every fps ever made?
      Literally everything but the first line applies to that. Even the first line could be changed to "Is it killing? Yes. Is it killing people? Yes."
      [–]Jess_than_three 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
      LOL, what? Video games are not killing people. Man, you pedos are fucking stupid.
      [–]Legen_unfiltered 4 points5 points6 points  (0 children)
      I am very against discrimination of any kind. But at the same time i understand that people are gonna be the way people are. I feel like a specific portion of users are getting the shaft on their ability to express themselves and discuss their interests, which i feel is kinda contrary to the whole idea of reddit.
      [–]DillonPressStart 43 points44 points45 points  (8 children)
      "Animated CP" is pretty retarded. There's no such thing. It's Loli hentai. I already don't like this admin. God dammit, he's almost as bad as Ellen Pao, and I don't even watch hentai.
      [–][deleted]  (1 child)
      [deleted]
        [–]HerrSepp -14 points-13 points-12 points  (5 children)
        Maybe not in the US, but under many other countries' laws fictional (meaning, in drawn, cgi or text form) child sexual abusive material is just as illegal as material depicting real, actual people. That said, afaik, reddit and its servers are based on the US, so their content falls under local law. Also, I'm not a psychologist, but I would hesitate to believe that this type of content is healthy to look at for thusly inclined people.
        [–]DillonPressStart 15 points16 points17 points  (2 children)
        Actually I would argue that allowing them to get it out of their system is healthier than repressing it.
        It's the same philosophy with drugs: turn them into criminals or let them satisfy their vices in a healthy way that doesn't hurt anybody?
        [–]HerrSepp 0 points1 point2 points  (1 child)
        You might be right there, I honestly don't know, hence the psychology disclaimer. I just wanted to annotate that "virtual" CSAM is in fact illegal in some countries and not only for easily dismissible reasons.
        [–]DillonPressStart 3 points4 points5 points  (0 children)
        I completely understand your side. People think it encourages pedophiles to sexualized children, it's a reasonably thing to fear. It's a hard issue, that's for sure. And you're right about the legality; in my country (Canada) it's illegal. But in Reddit's host country it's legal.
        [–]kinyutaka 11 points12 points13 points  (1 child)
        Honestly, why don't they use that fancy new Quarantine function they were so happy to tell us about?
        It's kind of stupid for them to say "we could have blocked these subs from people that didn't want to see them, but instead we will alienate the groups entirely by banning their content needlessly."
        [–]HerrSepp 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
        I didn't mean to imply any disagreement with what you just said there :)
        [–]internet_man_415 18 points19 points20 points  (0 children)
        Also apparently my favorite sub, /r/lolishota
        [–][deleted]  (1 child)
        [deleted]
          [–]Admiral_Cuntfart 9 points10 points11 points  (5 children)
          The fuck is pomf?
          [–]Der_Process 20 points21 points22 points  (1 child)
          It's also lolicon, based on a meme that comes from a comic.
          This might help
          [–]azoolie 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
          I don't get it. The sub gets banned but then it's right here in the comments, outside of the sub. This is better?
          Pomf doesn't even seem bad. It's just a meme based on something unsavory, like with 2girls1cup? Are we (reddit) really going to be that extremist/reactionary?
          [–]MyNameIsColby 22 points23 points24 points  (2 children)
          Oniichan, What are we going to do on the bed?
          [–]Guesty_ 4 points5 points6 points  (0 children)
          Good heavens, that's glorious.
          [–]SolCaelum 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
          I can understand seeing the racist subs has being a plausible source of harassment, but the loli/shota subs seemed to have kept to themselves and their banning seems to be more moral driven than anything. (Loli/Shota isn't illegal federally and varies state to state) I don't agree with those being straight up banned instead of being quarantined.
          [–]bwowm 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
          I'm shocked that antipozi was only quarantined and not banned. That's pretty much the most hateful sub on Reddit.
          [–]plutomutt 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
          The fat fucks banned pomf. Fuck Reddit, eat shit.
          [–]Bamres 0 points1 point2 points  (2 children)
          Can't access on baconreader at all
          [–]Der_Process 1 point2 points3 points  (1 child)
          From what i've been hearing, mobile apps are unable to access quarantined subs until you've already accepted to be able to see them on your account, which you can only do by accessing reddit through the normal webpage.
          [–]Bamres 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
          Ohh that kinda makes sense I guess
          [–]HELP_IM_ON_FIRE -1 points0 points1 point  (1 child)
          What about /r/shotacub? Why is that not gone...
          [–]Der_Process 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
          There are a lot more out there that have evaded notice so far it seems. They'll probably find them eventually but i'm not making a list of them.
          [–]Didalectic 641 points642 points643 points  (108 children)
          a handful of communities that exist solely to annoy other redditors
          If Shit Reddit Says doesn't fall under that definition, then I don't know what does.
          [–]BeyondSelfish 318 points319 points320 points  (74 children)
          Until that sub ist banned, the reddit admins are just blowing smoke out their asses.
          The sub exists to make fun of people for their comments, and brigade them for it.
          If that's not ban worthy, I dont know what is.
          [–]2four 199 points200 points201 points  (1 child)
          They like to pretend there are rules that they follow, but really it boils down to "we ban things we don't like." Why not just come out and say it /u/spez ? Quit pretending you operate under some flag of justice and just tell me that certain things you don't like and that's why you're banning them.
          [–]Kolonel_Angus 36 points37 points38 points  (0 children)
          Watch the tune. You might also get banned
          [–]Mad102190 -10 points-9 points-8 points  (5 children)
          I'm not defending SRS at all, since I've never seen it up until I read all the comments here, but I just looked at their sidebar and it explicitly states that redditors should not downvote the original/linked comments.
          Can someone explain why everyone hates that sub so much? Seriously curious.
          EDIT: funny how asking a serious question about something that I genuinely didn't know the answer to gets me downvoted into oblivion. Seems like the people in this thread are as hateful as any.
          [–]TheMightyFSM 12 points13 points14 points  (2 children)
          Because their users routinely disregard that rule and they've been known to brigade other subs
          [–]URETHRAL_DIARRHEA 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
          They haven't really done that with any regularity in at least 2 years.
          [–]Brainwash666 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
          Proof or gtfo
          [–]ReallyBadAtSpelling -3 points-2 points-1 points  (0 children)
          Because it makes fun of reddit's angsty neckbeard attitude, especially when it comes to things like feminism (zOMG!)
          [–]Claidheamh_Righ -67 points-66 points-65 points  (55 children)
          If that's not ban worthy, I dont know what is.
          Blatant racism and hate? Seriously, equating SRS to actual neo-nazis is ridiculous.
          Edit: -60-something points for thinking that a subreddit that gasp, brigades, isn't as bad as actual Nazis. Well done reddit. Well done.
          [–]BeyondSelfish 19 points20 points21 points  (11 children)
          I agree, SRS was way worse, not only do they have shitty views, like the racists, they actively pick fights about it and invade other subreddits.
          [–]caesar_primus -42 points-41 points-40 points  (9 children)
          Do you have any proof for your shitposts?
          [–]caesar_primus comment score below threshold-34 points-33 points-32 points  (7 children)
          Counterpoint:
          It looks like that's the standard go-to copy pasta for "What about SRS?" that's been constantly trotted out for the past year and a half, so I'll post my rebuttal, link by link, for the last time it was brought up:
          > 1) "Evidence" of brigading where users who posted comments saying some reprehensible things, like claiming corporate hacking is worse than rape, ended up in net downvotes. There is such a thing as SRS and average redditors agreeing that a comment is dumb/terrible. > > 2) SRD thread about a user being shadowbanned, the context being something about Gawker linking to Tumblr page that doxed some users. No mention of SRS. > > 3) Linked thread is about an /r/antiSRS mod being doxed, no mention of SRS. The guy being doxed said that the phone calls he received sounded like teenage boys you'd hear on Xbox Live. Could've been SRS, could've been 4chan. > > 4) From the linked thread: "Note, it was Adrien Chen of Gawker media who doxxed ViolentAcrez. It was not SRS." > > 5) I don't have the time to go through a month of IRC chat logs. From what I scanned, there were two instances of SRS users asking for upvotes: one in an SRS thread that was being brigaded by /r/mensrights, and one for a videogame competition charity thread. No doxing. In fact, one of the users in that chat log was pointing out that a /r/mensrights user was trying to dox a woman. > > 6) Jesus, another IRC log? Since the person who put together this list didn't post any evidence of brigading or doxing for this, I'm assuming they didn't actually look through the log for any evidence. > > 7) "Definitive" proof of brigading on a user's post that went from +19 to +14. > > 8) "Definitive" proof that that doesn't actually prove that admins are complicit in perceived SRS brigading. Some of the links lead back to links previously listed here, making this kind of a recursive citation.
          I stopped bothering to go through the list because more than half of the links don't support the claims being made, so there's not much reason to believe the rest will either. The post only appears legitimate because a giant wall of text appeals to the "[Citation Needed]" mindset of redditors. And even after going through and debunking a majority of them, someone can still claim that I didn't do my due diligence by debunking every single link. If this list were created in good faith, the author would have included actual quotes and explanations, not just links to entire months' worth of IRC logs or gigantic pictures of stitched together screenshots.
          [–]BeyondSelfish 12 points13 points14 points  (6 children)
          tldr
          [–]caesar_primus comment score below threshold-30 points-29 points-28 points  (5 children)
          That's okay, just by being literate you are smarter than most SRSsucks users.
          [–]until0 52 points53 points54 points  (40 children)
          SRS is blatant hate...
          [–]Brainwash666 -4 points-3 points-2 points  (0 children)
          Eyyyyy
          Hating bigots is equivalent to hatred of subjagted groups to you?
          [–]caesar_primus comment score below threshold-50 points-49 points-48 points  (38 children)
          Do you have any examples, or is it just hearsay?
          [–]until0 23 points24 points25 points  (37 children)
          Anecdotal experiences mainly. It's been a while since I've gone there though, since I don't subscribe there and have a filter for them in RES.
          It was a very toxic community, at the time, even the sidebar was hateful.
          [–]caesar_primus comment score below threshold-43 points-42 points-41 points  (36 children)
          So more hearsay? Can you at least pretend to validate your claims?
          [–]until0 29 points30 points31 points  (34 children)
          I literally replied and told you it was hearsay. I said my evidence was anecdotal..
          What on earth do you think that means? Do I need to be more blunt with you?
          No, I do not have any evidence. I am using my own experiences to guide my thoughts, which is how humans function.
          [–]caesar_primus comment score below threshold-42 points-41 points-40 points  (33 children)
          You use weasel words like toxic to describe them since you don't want to say anything that can be actually proven wrong and are promoting gut feelings. It may be human, but it's not admirable.
          And a big part of SRS is against tone policing. Oppressors have used arguments of tone to dismiss the oppressed forever, and SRS does not want to be a part of that.
          [–]Febtober2k 15 points16 points17 points  (0 children)
          You don't seem to understand what the word "heresay" means...
          [–]cantBanThis 8 points9 points10 points  (0 children)
          You're right, SRS is worse as they actually do things to people IRL. Neo-nazis just march around and drive up the price of WWII-vintage k98s.
          [–]I_Hate_NigNogs 3 points4 points5 points  (0 children)
          How does disliking blacks make you a national socialist?
          [–]James_Knox_Polk -15 points-14 points-13 points  (1 child)
          "If that's not ban worthy, I don't know what is."
          Are you a real person?
          "If that's not ban worthy, I don't know what is."
          You really can't think of anything that might be more ban worthy?
          "If that's not ban worthy, I don't know what is."
          Not a single one you know? Not subs based in violent racism, pure bigoted hatred, shaming people based on things they can't control?
          "If that's not ban worthy, I don't know what is."
          I'm actually amazed at this sentence.
          [–]James_Knox_Polk -31 points-30 points-29 points  (5 children)
          Could you provide an example of them brigading in 2015?
          [–][deleted]  (4 children)
          [deleted]
            [–]peoplerproblems 162 points163 points164 points  (5 children)
            Apparently it didn't.
            [–]Roboticide 57 points58 points59 points  (1 child)
            The entire Admin staff will quit before they see SRS banned.
            [–]aqouta 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
            Not exactly a dystopian future tbh
            [–]transfusion 5 points6 points7 points  (0 children)
            Watch out, you may trigger someone with that comment.
            [–]PeregrineFury 7 points8 points9 points  (0 children)
            Are you surprised? Neither did subreddit drama.
            [–]Death_To_Dem_Homos 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
            Investors won't give a shit about them, they will however give a shit about "yucky" subreddits and porn.
            [–]PullmanWater 5 points6 points7 points  (3 children)
            Do you honestly expect them to ever touch that sub? SRS is the correct kind of hate.
            [–]MS2point0 4 points5 points6 points  (2 children)
            Admins would get doxxed and harassed hard if they displeased the hugbox.
            [–]ReallyBadAtSpelling -3 points-2 points-1 points  (1 child)
            Yeah it's not like we know the names and backgrounds of any of the admins of reddit.
            [–]MS2point0 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
            Doxx can also be their home address, personal cell number, family information, etc...
            I would think that they wouldn't want that kind of information out there in nefarious hands...
            [–]Maximus_dinduicus 4 points5 points6 points  (10 children)
            Anything that Irby hag and her Anti-white, anti-men vagwarriors are moderating.
            [–]caesar_primus comment score below threshold-26 points-25 points-24 points  (9 children)
            White people deserve to get shit on.
            [–]ActionScripter9109 19 points20 points21 points  (4 children)
            White people deserve to get shit on.
            In most of this thread, caesar_primus, you tried to appear reasonable in your defenses of the admins and SRS. To a neutral observer, your positions might have seemed persuasive. With this comment, however, you simultaneously destroy your own credibility and reveal your affiliations.
            Obvious SRSer is obvious.
            [–]Maximus_dinduicus -1 points0 points1 point  (0 children)
            So you wanted me to post..
            "Niggers gonna nig. Why don't you go and not be a father to your kids shitavious."?
            Is that the kind of post you wanted? I just mentioned that there are plenty of subs that need to be banned.
            [–]caesar_primus -12 points-11 points-10 points  (2 children)
            If someone thinks that the victims of racism and harassment deserved it for being black, they aren't worth talking to.
            [–]ActionScripter9109 9 points10 points11 points  (1 child)
            That's very true. It also has no relevance to your comment or mine.
            [–]caesar_primus comment score below threshold-8 points-7 points-6 points  (0 children)
            It does, since my comment was a reply to a person who thought that. I like to rile up the racists.
            [–]dampfinil 2 points3 points4 points  (1 child)
            I reported your comment. I hope you get banned, but of course nothing will happen.
            [–]caesar_primus -2 points-1 points0 points  (0 children)
            NaCl
            [–]KaribouLouDied 6 points7 points8 points  (1 child)
            Holy shit you are the epitome of a fucking tumblr SJW. It's hilarious to see one in real life.
            So what is it like being a cunt?
            [–]caesar_primus comment score below threshold-9 points-8 points-7 points  (0 children)
            I dunno, you tell me.
            [–]Niggy_Azelia 1 point2 points3 points  (1 child)
            It can't fall under harrassment or anything, which extra ironic as it's the most hate filled sub on the site, with a very large following that brigades other subs daily.
            [–]Wubbaz0rg -3 points-2 points-1 points  (0 children)
            Has SRS really had any significance the last two years or so? Aside from the everlasting war with redpillers and such?
            [–]MichaelPraetorius 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
            It's in the fucking name I mean really
            [–]msiekkinen -2 points-1 points0 points  (4 children)
            Do they harass others? How are this, circlejerk and circlebroke really any different.
            [–]Didalectic 19 points20 points21 points  (3 children)
            Circlejerk just parodies ideas, whereas SRS targets individual commenters and comments which in effect is brigading. Another difference is the hostile intent of the sub.
            [–]msiekkinen -4 points-3 points-2 points  (2 children)
            Seemed like even if circlejerk is targeting ideas of the hivemind it leads to self circlejerking over specific comments (and consequently individuals)
            [–]Akitz 1 point2 points3 points  (1 child)
            Wrong way. The ideas come from the comments and those from the individuals, but you're talking out of your ass when you say circlejerk specifically traces the ideas origins. They couldn't care less, the reality is far less funny than the recycled ideas to them.
            [–]msiekkinen 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
            you're talking out of your ass when you say circlejerk specifically traces the ideas origins
            You're right, I meant to speak of circlebroke, the opening topic is expected to be links to specific comments of the thread with a synopsis of why it grinds your gears.
            [–]DiaboliAdvocatus 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
            That is pretty much all circlejerk subs TBH.
            [–]VY_Cannabis_Majoris 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
            Because it's not to annoy redditors.
            [–]Toraden 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
            Yeah but people outside of reddit don't complain about it so why would they ban it?
            [–]sarnald -4 points-3 points-2 points  (0 children)
            I feel like SRS is more satircal, much like circlejerk. It isn't specifically intended to instigate and bug redditors like some of the previous and currently banned subs
            [–]SuperAwesomeNinjaGuy 184 points185 points186 points  (20 children)
            Until SRD and SRS is banned every one of these post is just bullshit PR used as justification for banning content the Admins don't like.
            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.
            [–]muskawo -36 points-35 points-34 points  (8 children)
            Wait.. the racists made reddit what it is?
            Somehow I doubt that.
            edit: Going back through my history and downvoting is super clever, guys. QQ more.
            [–]SuperAwesomeNinjaGuy 25 points26 points27 points  (5 children)
            The users did, he is lying to them.
            (Also big surprise you post in SRS)
            [–]muskawo comment score below threshold-13 points-12 points-11 points  (4 children)
            Correction... I've posted in SRS... maybe twice in 3/4 years, or however long I've had an account.
            Its a bit too heavy on in jokes and circlejerks, tbh. But I certainly prefer them to racists, no question.
            [–]Dr_Lobster 1 point2 points3 points  (3 children)
            Eh... Still a sjw.
            [–]poesse comment score below threshold-11 points-10 points-9 points  (1 child)
            I hate this terminology. Stand up for not being racist/sexist and you're a "social justice warrior" .. the correct terminology should be "decent human being". Why is it that everytime someone gets called out for saying something racist or sexist they resort to the "SJW" defense? Maybe don't be a piece of shit and say misogynistic and racist things and then nobody will call you out for it. I'm not at all saying SRS is ok and I don't agree with vote brigading but equally cringey to me is when someone calls out a racist/sexist statement for what it is and the person who pointed it out gets called a SJW. Like what even is a social justice warrior? Someone who wants social justice and equality? Is that a bad thing?
            Just a note, it's unacceptable if someone downvotes you for bringing up mens rights because they disagree.. As long as you state your opinion in a respectful non misogynistic way. There's a lot of ways you can dicuss mens rights without shitting on women (just as feminists should not shit on men when they speak).
            I just really hate that term... SJW.
            [–]gamingmath 9 points10 points11 points  (0 children)
            Stand up for not being racist/sexist and you're a "social justice warrior"
            You don't stand for "not being racist/sexist." You're just part of another mob of people that hate and harass those that they perceive as "the other." It doesn't matter who your target is, nor how much you think they deserve it, you're still as vile as any other harasser.
            [–]muskawo -4 points-3 points-2 points  (0 children)
            How?
            [–]0fficerNasty 1 point2 points3 points  (1 child)
            Going back through my history and downvoting is super clever, guys. QQ more.
            We thought you'd be used to it by now, Mr. SRS.
            [–]muskawo -3 points-2 points-1 points  (0 children)
            please show me all my posts in srs? i found one so far... from months ago.
            [–]TAKEitTOrCIRCLEJERK -37 points-36 points-35 points  (10 children)
            SRD does everything we can to avoid harassing other subs and users - suggestions always welcome! :)
            [–]femstora 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
            How about using archive links instead of no participation links at least then you have to go to the sub in another way than the link.
            [–]SmellYaLater 6 points7 points8 points  (7 children)
            Here's a suggestion - fuck the fuck off. You ARE a brigading sub first and foremost.
            [–]TAKEitTOrCIRCLEJERK comment score below threshold-9 points-8 points-7 points  (6 children)
            Workable suggestions welcome :)
            [–]hanzes 11 points12 points13 points  (2 children)
            Okay, simple. Instead of linking to posts, force your users to link to imgur screenshots of that post with names censored and no way to trace that comment. Otherwise you're just a brigade.
            [–]TAKEitTOrCIRCLEJERK comment score below threshold-13 points-12 points-11 points  (1 child)
            That doesn't scale well, it's bad for mobile, and it doesn't update as the drama as it progresses :/
            [–]thefranchise97 3 points4 points5 points  (0 children)
            Sounds like a massive cop-out to be honest. If ensuring that the rules are followed requires a little more work, then that's unfortunate but there is no reason that you should circumvent it.
            [–]upcase 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
            Seems pretty self-explanatory.
            [–]McFluffypom 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
            How about you break off your ties with SRS, stop finding sadistic pleasure in other people's personal debates, and remember that every person deserves to be treated with respect.
            [–]mcpuck 80 points81 points82 points  (7 children)
            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.
            [–]Iron_Booger_59 132 points133 points134 points  (5 children)
            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.
            [–]Taylor7500 153 points154 points155 points  (6 children)
            /r/coontown will be reclassified. The content there is offensive to many, but does not violate our current rules for banning.
            You specifically said that it won't be banned. I don't care for the subreddit myself, but your constant lack of consistency doesn't encourage trust between the users and admins.
            [–]Lumpyguy 412 points413 points414 points  (106 children)
            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.
            [–]culman13 324 points325 points326 points  (26 children)
            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?
            [–]zerconic 226 points227 points228 points  (25 children)
            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?
            [–]mmencius 17 points18 points19 points  (0 children)
            /u/spez, are your promises actually workable? I don't really see anyone talking about how Reddit's chief engineer Bethanye Blount quit less than a month ago.
            Blount said she left because she did not think she “could deliver on promises being made to the community.”
            “I feel like there are going be some big bumps on the road ahead for Reddit,” Blount said. “Along the way, there are some very aggressive implied promises being made to the community — in comments to mods, quotes from board members — and they’re going to have some pretty big challenges in meeting those implied promises.”
            [–]metalmartyr 73 points74 points75 points  (1 child)
            Hm... /u/yishan was right. You and Alexis really are worse than Pao could ever have been.
            [–]Lynch_King 90 points91 points92 points  (3 children)
            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.
            [–]Corbee 56 points57 points58 points  (6 children)
            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.
            [–]Hexogen 18 points19 points20 points  (2 children)
            Why do I have to have a verified email to view a quarantined subreddit? What kind of shit policy is that? Just have your annoying splash page with a click through link.
            I shouldn't need to give you my email just because someone else is offended by the content.
            [–]dblagbro 46 points47 points48 points  (4 children)
            How do we "opt in" for EVERYTHING? Not that I agree with everything but I come to reddit to get an uncensored exposure to all the web has to offer - I really would like to keep it that way. How do it prevent you from "babysitting" me if I know I'm a grown adult and accept all that comes with it?
            tl;dr - how do I set my account to "offend me please"?
            [–]DonkiestOfKongs 120 points121 points122 points  (10 children)
            From an information security standpoint: How will you be storing the data about what quarantined subreddits I've opted into? In the event of a security breach, how easily could this information be associated with my 'verified email'?
            [–]ibnwarraq 187 points188 points189 points  (20 children)
            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.
            [–]Bartisgod 50 points51 points52 points  (3 children)
            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?
            [–]Mindless_Consumer 98 points99 points100 points  (7 children)
            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.
            [–]drebin8 95 points96 points97 points  (16 children)
            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...
            [–]Saint_Judas 86 points87 points88 points  (6 children)
            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.
            [–]Wildelocke 9 points10 points11 points  (0 children)
            The purpose of quarantining is not to 'protect' users from content. That's asinine: people don't end up on /r/coontown by accident.
            It's to undermine their sense of security by forcing them to opt in to questionable content: meaning if their email verified account is ever linked to their real identities, they can be id'ed as racists, pedophiles, etc. This limits the growth of those communities, and makes it harder for sponsors to see them.
            [–]thelastjuju 34 points35 points36 points  (2 children)
            Irony here is that NOTHING has annoyed redditers as a whole more than the unprecedented level of censorship from the top imposed over the last few months.
            We're not just talking fatpeoplehate either. Who remembers the pro-choice thread a month ago where they ordered every pro-life comment to be deleted? Disgusting how far you dun fell, reddit. We can't even have the most sophomoric of political discussions here, yet spez claims reddit is "the best place online to have truly authentic conversations."
            [–]thesexygazelle 51 points52 points53 points  (1 child)
            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.
            [–]jeremyfrankly 26 points27 points28 points  (14 children)
            You updated the content policy to make it very clear why a group gets banned. Then you completely ignored it and banned a group for a reason you cannot point to in the new content policy.
            I've never been to /r/CoonTown, I don't like /r/CoonTown, but this isn't really acceptable. People have been asking for clear rules and you've demonstrated that you're not able to provide them. If they were doing offsite or message harassment, just say so and I'd be happy. I'd think that was an acceptable reason.
            [–]jpatton89 26 points27 points28 points  (1 child)
            "Prohibited behavior: Asking for votes or engaging in vote manipulation"
            Phew! Since we all know vote bridgading is a form of "manipulation", SRS and Bestof are going to get banned if they continue to brigade (or in other words, exist)...you know, now that this new content policy update clearly mentions no vote manipulation. Glad we got this cleared up!
            "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" I think it's pretty clear that SRS is a cancer on the community and needs to go. It ABSOLUTELY prevents many people from being able to enjoy Reddit. The brigade of downvotes they bring makes people afraid to say what they want. Every day you allow that sub to exist, you're showing how hypocritical you are. That you are making arbitrary decisions on what subs get banned based on nothing more than your personal preference.
            [–]james52312 108 points109 points110 points  (8 children)
            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..
            [–]Akudra 27 points28 points29 points  (0 children)
            Our policies are not changing dramatically from what we have had in the past.
            The update to the policy:
            we are banning a handful of communities that exist solely to annoy other redditors, prevent us from improving Reddit, and generally make Reddit worse for everyone else.
            Seems like a pretty dramatic change to me as it is effectively a "whatever sticks" clause to justify banning any sub you find undesirable.
            When are you going to update the values page to erase all this free speech business that you seem to no longer care about?
            [–]thegoodstudyguide 130 points131 points132 points  (8 children)
            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.
            [–]GreyWalker 71 points72 points73 points  (35 children)
            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
            [–]somebodylies 45 points46 points47 points  (11 children)
            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.
            [–]pocketknifeMT 46 points47 points48 points  (2 children)
            Why not simply announce the real content policy: Calvinball.
            Just straight up say, "fuck you, I do what I want."
            It would at least have the advantages of ringing true and never needing to update it again.
            edit: conjugation is fun!
            [–]youdontseekyoda 47 points48 points49 points  (14 children)
            Reading Coontown was interesting, from a sociological standpoint. Their views were generally reprehensible, but they are by no means in the minority (many of their posters were Hispanic, Asians, and other ethnic groups).
            It seems like /u/spez is applying typical Social Justice Warrior logic to his banning decisions. If it makes anyone uncomfortable, anywhere, it deserves to be reviewed for possible quarantine or ban. Well, freedom gives you the right to get offended. That's the beauty of it. You don't need to read things you disagree with, and you don't need to agree with everything to support a platform.
            Unfortunately, it seems /u/spez was born with a silver spoon in his mouth (his high school cost $26,000/year), and his contact with anyone outside his wealthy tiny .01% circle is probably minimal. He's making decisions for the rest of us, when he doesn't understand us.
            He's trying to 'protect' us in a paternalistic condescending way. We're all adults (well, most of us are). We don't need you to tell us what's best for us.
            Reddit is dying.
            [–]uvulectomy 19 points20 points21 points  (2 children)
            So as before, you are banning communities for the sole reason that 1) you don't agree with them, or 2) they threaten your advertising revenue because they simply exist.
            And once again, the reason given for the banning is because they "exist solely to annoy other redditors, prevent us from improving Reddit, and generally make Reddit worse for everyone else."
            Under that logic, why is SRS still not banned? They harass, dox, brigade, comb the histories of users they don't like solely to downvote ancient comments, and do nothing but talk about how much they hate Reddit (yet they still use it).
            And just recently, a couple of SRS users THREATENED A WOMAN WITH RAPE because she had the temerity to say something they didn't like. When this was brought to the attention of the SRS mods, they banned HER... for reporting abusive messages and rape threats.
            This is the EXACT type of behavior that you supposedly banned FPH and other subs for. So I ask again:

            WHY DOES SRS GET A FREE PASS???

            You have been given numerous and REPEATED examples of SRS violating the VERY SAME RULES you use to censor other communities, yet you do NOTHING to SRS.
            SRS is consistently voted the most toxic community on the entire site. They add nothing of value, and they actively seek to make everyone's experience worse.
            And still, you do nothing. In doing nothing, you are complicit in their behavior. Your platitudes of "banning behavior, not ideas" is rendered bunk. You are actively seeking to silence not those who break rules, but those who hurt your feelings. Instead of banning them for the same reasons you supposedly banned other subs, you merely "develop tools to keep them from doing anything mean."
            What dirt do they have on you, /u/spez?
            Ban SRS, stop lying to the users about your motives, and grow a goddamn spine. Or soon enough they will turn on you as well, and you will have nobody left to sympathize with you.
            [–]dragonfangxl 52 points53 points54 points  (5 children)
            Today, in addition to applying Quarantines, we are banning a handful of communities that exist solely to annoy other redditors, prevent us from improving Reddit, and generally make Reddit worse for everyone else.
            I dont understand. Why bother making this new tool (quarantines) if you're still going to ban subreddits? Do you not trust the effectiveness of this tool? Also is there a list of the subreddits being banned?
            [–]Demolishing 234 points235 points236 points  (48 children)
            Is involuntary pornography
            How will this affect stuff like /r/amateur and /r/realgirls and /r/SluttyHalloween ?
            [–]bioemerl 97 points98 points99 points  (26 children)
            I think that this refers to having photos taken of you, not controlling how people see the content you release personally.
            [–]Synsc 105 points106 points107 points  (24 children)
            Ultimately it would be impossible to judge whether the subject who's photo is taken agreed to having it shared, you know?
            Is that naked selfie supposed to only stay on that phone, or did someone leak it? It's impossible to do for all content I suppose.
            [–]ACAFWD 65 points66 points67 points  (18 children)
            I think it means that if someone asks reddit to remove a picture of them, they'll comply. I think that was already the policy, but this is putting it in writing.
            [–]hannar 64 points65 points66 points  (7 children)
            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.
            [–]PmMeYourWhatever 59 points60 points61 points  (20 children)
            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 . . . :(
            [–]13speed 38 points39 points40 points  (4 children)
            This was predicted to happen after Chairman Pao fell on her sword; the New Boss would be hailed as the Savior, and then swiftly take an axe to anything on reddit that might keep away advertising dollars.
            It's about the money.
            It's always about the money.
            This is about monetizing the site, which means a move to sanitization and less tolerance of any opinion not deemed "safe".
            [–]discardoursouls 34 points35 points36 points  (20 children)
            You're so full of shit /u/spez. Just be honest that you want to turn Reddit into some shitty, politically correct corporate advertising board. If you actually gave a fuck about what "annoys" us as redditors, you would ban the people who ACTUALLY brigade and doxx us (/r/shitredditsays, /r/subredditdrama, /r/cringe). Sure, /r/coontown was a vile subreddit, but they followed the rules. They never left their sub to harass others. By banning their sub you aren't kicking them out, you're letting them in. They're going to spread their filth all over the rest of reddit now because their containment zone has been destroyed. Great fucking job genius.
            [–]wigglypoocool 45 points46 points47 points  (1 child)
            Create "quarantine" subs, then turns around and bans subreddit...
            Why bother creating quarantines in the first place?
            [–]toxicass 10 points11 points12 points  (1 child)
            How bought you just stop updating policy? Reddit was just fine before you started messing with it. Guess what? If I don't feel like being offended, I don't go to places that offend me.
            [–]edafade 660 points661 points662 points  (50 children)
            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.
            [–]chillaxbrohound 59 points60 points61 points  (14 children)
            You need to understand that there are a shockingly high number of people who don't understand the philosophical concept of free speech and free thought.
            Back in Phil101 I had to do a debate on Speech Codes. Back then I wasn't even remotely "racist" by today's standards. I was writing essays against white privilege passionately at the time. Anyway, I remember I had to defend the idea of people being able to speak and write whatever they want - including racist things - on their own private sites.
            That is't quite the same as what has happened here. But more on that in a minute.
            The point is that the class already took issue with this. The mere act of speaking those words seemed to have the psychic effect of makong them feel as though I was apologizing for hateful ideas and thoughts. Yet what I was really doing was standingg up for a radical anti-authoritarianism that is against any situation where authority is concentrated in one group over another, so long as that group does not intrude.
            So, it was a wake up call for me. When it comes to identity politics and any issue one might consider related to "political correctness," people are profoundly stupid.
            Yet since then I became aware of radically free thinking texts like The Bell Curve. Discussion of "racist" texts like those is all but forbidden everywhere on this site. And I find that to be downright embarrassing for everyone involved.
            Now, the difference is that Reddit is a private site.
            But that doesn't change the fact that the idea and concept of free speech is still a thing. And by all measures of fairness, Reddit has shown that it does not support those concepts and philosophies. It supports authority rule over fringe subs and controlling what is allowed to be spoken - and thus thought - on its URL. And that's very sad.
            There is no way around it. Coontown existed. Nobody had to look at it. But ideology and ideas are now being enforced. Thought is being enforced. And the mere existence of those thoughts is intolerable now, regardless of whether they actually appear elsewhere. The mere freedom of thought was too much.
            Instead of debate and discussion, the boot is used. I might have shrugged and said "little has been lost, it's bad but oh well," but today I know that this represents the debasement of a philosophical idea and that this site does not stand for what is right anymore.
            I encourage people to leave now instead of apologizing for Reddit. You may agree with their ideas and political views, yet you now do so without any risk of being challenged. Your ideas are now to be enforced like a religion. That's not something to be proud of. It's something to be ashamed by.
            The tendency is to laugh this off. "It's minor." "Come on, they're just racists!"
            Sure. It's also just the ability for individuals to decide for themselves what's right without being told by the guy wearing the Swastika or Stalinist Insignia on his shirt what he can and can't think. It's the right for groups to naturally discover the best ideas via discussion unfettered by ideological dogmatism and people looking over their shoulder telling them they "just can't say that."
            But go ahead and laugh about it.
            [–]favreseviltwin 38 points39 points40 points  (7 children)
            There it is, reddit has started banning "offensive" subreddits.
            How did they do it? They decided to devalue the subreddit to nothing more than trolls.
            Remember how they said they weren't going to ban /r/coontown like 2 weeks ago? Well they waited for you to become complacent before taking their next step.
            Little by little they will warp this site to their new vision. In a year from now reddit will be nothing more than an echo chamber/circle jerk where corporate interests control what we see.
            There will still be cat pictures though.
            [–]soul_seek 166 points167 points168 points  (22 children)
            Why is CoonTown banned when you specifically said it wouldn't be just a few weeks ago?
            [–]A_Moon_Cricket 63 points64 points65 points  (6 children)
            This is what I want to know. I have a feeling it has to do with the /r/FuckCoontown and /r/BlackLadies campaign against Reddit advertisers. I guess we may just have to do the same about all of the subs, mainly ALL of the NSFW subs that most companies would not want to participate on.
            Together we can kill reddit.
            EDIT:
            Hello.
            I am a user on the site www.reddit.com, where your company has purchased advertisements. I would like you to be aware that the site where your advertisement money is going has your ads displayed on some very (very) questionable pages...
            As of right now reddit is hosting a huge amount for bestiality content. Do you want your brand associated with a site that hosts this sort of content? I certainly would not want to do business with a company who has their ads displayed on such a disgusting and filthy site. A small example of what is being hosted on reddit.com where your company advertises:
            Reddit is a toxic website disguised as a family friendly community but instead it hosts the largest bestiality and grotesque animal abuse communities on the internet. Not only that, there is a plethora of human porn communities being hosted where your advertisments are being served as well:
            and many many more. Everything from incest to communities sharing photos of women who are unaware that their photos are being shared with the internet for perverts to enjoy.
            I hope that you will reconsider how you spend your advertising dollars and re-evaluate your ad-campaign on Reddit to see if the ROI is worth having your brand associated with such vile and disgusting content.
            Let's hit Reddit where it'll hurt them the most... right in the sheckles. Oy vey! The only reason CoonTown was BANNED instead of quarantined like we were originally promised is because the BlackLadies contacted Reddit's advertisers. We can do the same! I don't give a shit about any of those subreddits mentioned but if advertisers didn't want their ads on coontown, they're sure as shit not going to want them on /r/incest and /r/picsofhorsedicks
            Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy. © 2015 reddit inc. All rights reserved.
            REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.
            π Rendered by PID 17903 on app-339 at 2015-08-06 11:38:58.319441+00:00 running 556e64c country code: DE.
            0%
             
            10%
             
            20%
             
            30%
             
            40%
             
            50%
             
            60%
             
            70%
             
            80%
             
            90%
             
            100%