上位 200 件のコメント表示する 500

[–]zoninationOC: 22[M] [スコア非表示] stickied comment (0子コメント)

It looks like the original Author of this article, /u/shorttails, was kind enough to show up to this thread and answer some questions you may have about it. It seems appropriate to sicky a link to this comment chain for context:

https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/611odv/dissecting_trumps_most_rabid_online_following/dfb7bxt/

We hope the provided link assists you in having an informed discussion in this thread, or inspires you to remix this data.

[–]ShilohShay 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (37子コメント)

The subreddit’s moderators declined to talk to us about their community and accused FiveThirtyEight of being “fake news.”

Why does reddit's admins allow themselves to be em embarrassed like this over and over? Just do to them what you did to fatpeoplehate.

[–]poly_atheist 10 ポイント11 ポイント  (20子コメント)

You think the admins should shut the sub down because their mods refused to talk to a journo who's writing a hit piece on them?

[–]mace9984 39 ポイント40 ポイント  (18子コメント)

It wasn't a hit piece. It was data.

[–]poly_atheist 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (4子コメント)

That's not the point. It was an article that shed a bad light on them. Why would they cooperate?

[–]gopec 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

To be fair, if you're not an "un-cucked" "Alpha-pede" you won't get a word in edgewise with any of those people. T_D members/mods don't like to be questioned. Just post pics of frogs.

[–]mace9984 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I agree that it wouldn't be in their interest to cooperate. I just didn't think hit piece was a fair term.

[–]cowpace 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

...which was then spun into a hit piece

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

Because Eddit is dying thanks to the admins' vitriolic bias, and they need to keep up the traffic stats any way that they can to prevent the investors from firing them.

[–]Darsint 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (1子コメント)

There's a difference between hosting a community that has toxic elements and hosting a community that actively harasses and doxxes other subreddits and users. Reddit is fine with hosting the first as long as they keep to themselves. It cannot (and should not) tolerate the second type.

/fatpeoplehate was definitively in the second category.

[–]as-wichita-falls 19 ポイント20 ポイント  (10子コメント)

It's a containment sub. Banning it would cause more problems than it's worth.

[–]Stealth_of_the_Sea 22 ポイント23 ポイント  (9子コメント)

It's not a containment, it's a breeding ground. Look at fat people hate when it was removed. They have lost a ton of the power they had.

[–]30blues -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

... I don't see any reason to ban them

[–]Foamloller 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (56子コメント)

Really depends how you define hate.

I occasionally go to r/politics and find incredibly hateful comments towards Trump supporters.

Someone could probably say that T_D is really hateful, but the most common "insult" is "cuck".

Is there a single person who would actually be insulted or offended by that word?

Compare that to being called a Nazi, which is an incredibly horrific ideogy to be labeled as.

Of course, this is a simplistic analysis just looking at words used, so it makes sense. A comment defending yourself for being called a racist/Nazi would be flagged itself as "associating with racism" with this analysis.

[–]DickFeely 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (26子コメント)

And "cuck" is an analogy - that is, being so lost in your character and basic social values that you like the idea of another man banging your wife. In a political context, it's when you think it's good and laudable for your constituents to get screwed. It's why Trump asserting that the job of an elected official is to represent the American people first is controversial.

Edit: downvote and comment brigade showed up! Hello, shareblue shills!

[–]Foamloller -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (9子コメント)

I think the reason T_D uses "cuck" is because reasonable people won't be offended by it. Only people looking to be offended will get offended by it.

It makes people on /r/politics look silly when they point to T_D's usage of "cuck" as an example of hate labels, especially when they throw "Nazi", "racist" and the 10 other labels around that actually imply a serious insult/problem.

[–]docmartens 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (7子コメント)

Cuck has racist overtones. It originated on 4chan to describe Swedish people inviting refugees into their homes to fuck their wives. It also implies women are property.

Am I being reasonable enough, or am I unreasonable just for disagreeing with you?

[–]Foamloller -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (3子コメント)

Cuck has racist overtones.

Oh come on now.

Am I being reasonable enough

Not really. You're implying it has something to do with being Swedish, when apparently it's describing a specific sexual (non)-act.

That fact that you had to explain how it's offensive is pretty telling.

I've literally never encountered someone being insulted by the word. Or even seen someone actually get offended by that on the internet.

It's on the same level as "asshole" or "idiot".

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

Oh come on now.

No, it actually does. That's not out of thin air.

[–]m3k1l13 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (2子コメント)

That's false entirely. Cuckold refers to a couple that receives sexual enjoyment from inviting another person to sexually fulfill the needs of one partner while the other watches. There is no "gender" involved at all. You're being unreasonable by projecting your own sexist insecurities. Instead of understanding ones own sexism, or gender bias, they project them by claiming sexism in uncalled-for situations that will alleviate your own sexism with a feeling of "winning" or "showed them" much akin "instant karma." Same goes for racism. Very common in politics these days on every side.

Edit: my definition of cuckold is incorrect, see below for correct definition and elaboration.

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

Get your critical thinking out of here, people are trying to project their virtuousness over others.

[–]Spiralyst 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (2子コメント)

If you don't want to be called a Nazi, don't rub shoulders with white supremacists and antisemites. Simple.

The truly staggering part is how Conservatives just eat mind erasers whenever things get uncomfortable.

Case in point: Richard Spencer was kicked out of the CPAC as the, and I shit you not this is how it was labeled, leader of the National Policy Institute, a radical LEFTWING organization.

[–]kweer 29 ポイント30 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I agree. He implies that /r/politics is neutral and uses washingtonpost and vox articles as evidence that some of the others subs are "hate" subs.

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

I think you're misunderstanding the methodology of this analysis.

The author isn't looking at the content of the comments posted to each subreddit but rather the:

the analysis is based on commenter overlap: Two subreddits are deemed more similar if many commenters have posted often to both.

This is not evaluating whether calling someone a 'cuck' is worse than a 'nazi' but looking at what other subreddits posters are most likely to associate with.

[–]Kalarian_Reborn[🍰] 10 ポイント11 ポイント  (12子コメント)

I'd love it if this sub was just data and displays. Getting pretty tired of politics bleeding in to every other sub I visit.

The data in the article lets you draw some obvious conclusions. But damn, That was one of the most biased hamfisted articles I've ever seen in this sub.

It really is a shame.

[–]linkiszelda1990 -4 ポイント-3 ポイント  (11子コメント)

How so?

[–]Kalarian_Reborn[🍰] 10 ポイント11 ポイント  (10子コメント)

After that it’s r/uncensorednews, a subreddit started by white nationalist moderators who found the existing, extremely popular r/news subreddit to be too liberal.

Thats one of many statements that just ooze passive aggression and condescension. And it's also not true. Yes, that sub has devolved to being a right wing outlet basically. But to compare it to the "extremely popular" news sub is a bit silly simply because being a default sub it's impossible for it to not be extremely populated.

It was also started when r/news was rabidly deleting ANY post about the Paris terror attacks. It wasn't just white nationalists that were angry at the news mods. It was the whole site.

I mean, yes the site is openly left leaning, but I'd prefer my data and analysis without the passive aggression attitude of a 15 year old. This sub did a pretty good job of staying neutral but lately it's becoming more and more biased and circle jerky.

[–]digital_end 16 ポイント17 ポイント  (0子コメント)

But... I mean that's exactly what happened. They didn't advertize the sub as right wing, because they were trying to draw in moderates. But the people who made it were nationalists and had that clear agenda.

The mods created and curated it as that, collecting subs through claims of nutrality during a screw up by the existing group. It was a move to capture an audience that worked moderately well. Better had they used other accounts and not been so obvious.

That sub is exactly as he described it.

[–]Razoride 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Reddit is fucked.

Just look at these fucking comments and tell me it's not.

[–]goat_nebula 22 ポイント23 ポイント  (31子コメント)

To simply call r/politics a subreddit for interest in politics is laughable. That place is just liberal/anti-trump spam.

[–]aluben_x 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (17子コメント)

All of its posts are articles from major news outlets. Occasionally some left wing slanted news like Huff Po.

[–]ClassicSchmosby1 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (9子コメント)

Trump has an almost 60% disapproval rating. The country is rapidly becoming a place for anti-trump spam.

Y'all are just too dumb to see it.

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

Only in your echo chamber comrade - where cherry picked polls predict democrat landslides.

[–]Drock37 [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

I gotta agree with this - Can we really trust polls anymore? Everyone i see seems to be completely biased - Maybe its my area, or the people i hang out with - but most people seem to be just find with Trump and what hes doing - sure not 100%, but you'll never get that with any President. As soon as you turn of the MSM and get off Reddit an entirely new picture starts to be painted.

[–]xenodude1199 -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (9子コメント)

As obviously anti-right wing biased as it is, I actually enjoyed the read

Good post op

[–]134_and_counting -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (2子コメント)

This is one of those things that FEELS right because it matches what most people in the Reddit community have noticed. But humans are very prone to drawing conclusions from incomplete or anecdotal evidence so it's interesting to see a semi-quantitative analysis. I would want to play with it more to find out if our gut instincts are actually supported by reality.

[–]yoda133113 -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yup, without similar analysis of other subs this tells us very little.

[–]VinKelsier 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (7子コメント)

Preface - I am not a fan of Trump and did not vote for him.

I think this is a pretty bad case of proving what you want to prove. r/politics+games also gives KotakuInAction as a high result, and r/politics is a left-leaning opposite to T_D. Past that, I'm not even convinced KotakuInAction is as misogynistic as you are saying - it seems like you are just going with a left-leaning description of the sub meant to shut down discussion.

r/politics+europe has r/european with a .65 similarity, 3 times higher than your list of bad subs with fatpeoplehate, redpill, etc. And of course, you got all of those by taking away the left leaning r/politics rather than some sort of a neutral discussion.

You seem to be treating .27 results right up there with .7 results, and not giving a second to discussing the differences there. But then other reddit comments respond with "most people yada yada" - which I guess what what you were aiming for with this piece?

It is interesting the process you are doing, but the actual piece you wrote reeks of biased crap with no real care about what the data is actually saying.

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

nate silver was completely destroyed last year. what a joke of a human being

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

Not racist. Just a 1st generation college grad, son of an immigrant that wants to MAGA

[–]Euthenios 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (3子コメント)

Dear T_D:

You're all pieces of shit and I can prove it mathematically.

Signed, 538

[–]seius -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Typical 538, mental gymnastics to get their readers to believe whatever their agenda dictates.

[–]BrianPillmansGun [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Just more guilt by association. Tactic of the left for decades.

[–]nvanprooyen 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (3子コメント)

That’s a lot of analysis to conclude that the_donald members are a bunch of racist, xenophobic, misogynistic fucktards. Something that's patently obvious to most of us. Interesting nonetheless, enjoyed reading it and the methodology that was used.

[–]rhieverViz Practitioner | Randy Olson 435 ポイント436 ポイント  (290子コメント)

Essentially, most of the people who post on /r/The_Donald also post on subreddits associated with hate, bigotry, racism, misogyny, etc. Can't say I'm surprised with the findings.

[–]SomeSortOfMachine 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (1子コメント)

This. This so much. Also disproves the whole 'lol it is only trolls/pro-memers bro' argument.

T_D, and Drumpf/Republican supports at large, are disgusting people that have some sort of interaction and involvement in racism, sexism, hate, guns, etc etc. Things that are unsavory at best and destructive to the fabric of society at worst. The cognitive dissonance they have proclaiming they are for everyone, except blacks, asians, gays, trans, muslims, etc etc is just ridiculous.

The normalization of hate that Trump and his cronies/supporters have caused can be seen in the microcosm that is T_D.

[–]Ultramerican 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (1子コメント)

"most"

Hilariously baseless claim on a subreddit dedicated to data.

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

Correction: Subreddit that used to be dedicated to data. Now it just pretends.

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

What a shocker. Do they also speak mostly in caps and HTML coding?

[–]as-wichita-falls 19 ポイント20 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Essentially, most of the people who post on /r/The_Donald also post on subreddits associated with hate, bigotry, racism, misogyny, etc.

How did you arrive at 51%?

[–]Spiralyst 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Nobody is at this point.

Cue the Donald Trump information deconstruction army.

[–]Procrastinare 249 ポイント250 ポイント  (133子コメント)

It's pretty easy to recognize them from just the way they interact with other people online. Even in totally non-political conversations you can recognize a frequent T_D user. That sub is basically a troll safe space. Trump is more like a mascot/idol for online hate groups. Not so much that he started anything unique, but he became a unifying force that brought the worst of internet culture under one roof.

[–]Sintanan 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (3子コメント)

All we need now is Trump to say he approves of 4chan and really unify the internet hate machine under one mascot.

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

Yeah, I used that one site to pull and tag T_D posters on my RES, it's really rarely a surprise to see that tag beside a vitriolic poster.

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

Can you do something similar to filter them out?

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

I'm honestly not sure. I don't mind them or anything, it's just nice to have the early warning that I'm dealing with one of them. No sense trying to argue with someone who's just a thinly-veiled shitposter.

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

I'll have to do that. An early warning system that this person is someone who isn;t worth explaining things too without the aid of crayons is a good thing. It's pointless to use logic to try and combat someone's views, when they never used logic to form them.

[–]Sam-Gunn 118 ポイント119 ポイント  (92子コメント)

Yup, you can especially recognize their arguments, as they were spoon fed most of them and cannot accurately deviate from what they were fed, and they react very badly to any attempt to get them to do so on your end.

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

I hear that. Personally I try to stay out of it, but even a goddamn thread I started about the mere possibility of a non-white Wolverine can get them riled up. One of them, at least.

... it wasn't a very popular thread :(

[–]DefinitelyNWYT 88 ポイント89 ポイント  (62子コメント)

21-28% isn't exactly "most" of its users, but it certainly reveals a tendency.

[–]Lemonlime0 14 ポイント15 ポイント  (26子コメント)

It'd be interesting to see how bots may have skewed the numbers here. I'm surprised that a 1/4 of the users branch out to these other subs though. That's quite a lot of people who are actively seeking out like-minded hate groups to associate with. It's quite alarming, because I feel like this is due to political polarization that is continuously feeding these mongers.

[–]ZeeBeeblebrox 123 ポイント124 ポイント  (21子コメント)

I'd say 1 in 4 being outspoken racists is pretty damn bad tbh.

[–]mister_miner_GL 26 ポイント27 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Now I'm wondering what other subs break down like

[–]Babakins 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

This is a very important distinction

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

ITT: redcaps trying to say /r/politics is more hateful than t_d and their related subs. /r/kiketown etc.

Damage control out in force

[–]cmullen6 -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

The subreddit’s moderators declined to talk to us about their community and accused FiveThirtyEight of being “fake news.”

That is so sad it's almost funny

[–]BuddingNation 19 ポイント20 ポイント  (14子コメント)

We're in strange times with strange, unreasonable extremists on both the right and the left. I am banned from /r/The_Donald & from /r/socialism. I'm banned from Donald for asking for a source to a claim that Hillary was selling to Russia. I'm banned from socialism for stating that people who come to the United States illegally are criminals because of the criminal act of crossing the border without authorization.

Asking for sources and recognizing the law of the land - wtf. There is no room in this country for a moderate today.

[–]windhover -4 ポイント-3 ポイント  (4子コメント)

I've read it. I have no idea as to the degree of truth that can be derived from it. I've learned enough to know that many sources and "studies" post information that supports their ideology or agenda. All sides do it and I'm not going to invest the time and effort to find the gaps in truth.

So, I'm going to go on the understanding that, like similar stories and summaries posted by both sides, this has some truth to it but doesn't really tell the whole story nor capture reality particularly accurately.

[–]Flyberius 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

This is delicious.

I do agree that it should be done to other subs too though.

[–]Replacment_Sock 91 ポイント92 ポイント  (33子コメント)

My only issue with this is they use r/politics, and make reference to it, as though it is politically neutral by defining it as "commentators general interest in politics". The notion that r/politics is politically neutral is nonsense for anyone who has actually visited the page. Comments there aside, one needs to only tally the number of left leaning sources against right leaning sources that make up its front page. If r/politics is the control, I think that would certainly skew the results.

Edit: That said, the methodology employed is cool as fuck. I am still curious, however, how it is such a methodology controls for users with multiple accounts.

[–]Major_T_Pain 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (6子コメント)

Your undefined use of the terms "left leaning sources" and "right leaning sources" is vague and doesn't support your assertion, and it also smacks of false equivalency.

Balance is not necessarily found when opposing viewpoints are compared/shared equally, especially not in today's politics where lies are being shouted above the truth.
Sources reporting fact checked and substantiated data should be more heavily weighted in something like this.
Add to that, recently we saw that polarization/spin is a majority conservative issue

So, I would expect a sub dedicated to mostly reporting actual news and mostly factual information would actually seem to the conservative mind as being "Liberal". After all, "Facts, as we all know, do have a well known liberal bias" - Colbert

EDIT: *headdesk*
This is why we can't have civil dialogue.

[–]Replacment_Sock -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (3子コメント)

Your undefined use of the terms "left leaning sources" and "right leaning sources" is vague and doesn't support your assertion, and it also smacks of false equivalency.

Right, I didn't define them because they are self-defining. Also, no, it is not a false equivalency and, if you believe it is, you need to actually identify the the A B C and the switch or else you are committing a sad act of intellectual laziness.

Balance is not necessarily found when opposing viewpoints are compared/shared equally, especially not in today's politics where lies are being shouted above the truth. Sources reporting fact checked and substantiated data should be more heavily weighted in something like this. Add to that, recently we saw that polarization/spin is a majority conservative issue

I'm glad you came to the conclusion that right leaning sources are generally less truthful by referencing a study on the social media habits of users on the left and right, i.e., a study that examines behavior, not sources.

So, I would expect a sub dedicated to mostly reporting actual news and mostly factual information would actually seem to the conservative mind as being "Liberal". After all, "Facts, as we all know, do have a well known liberal bias" - Colbert

Woosh! The information presented on any given sub could indeed be truthful, just as it can also be selective in what it shares and omits. Also, I'm glad the intellectual you look up to for saying something profound is a left leaning comedian who specializes in clown nose on, clown nose off routine.

[–]brgrss 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (1子コメント)

" Facts, as we all know, do have a well known liberal bias" - Colbert

This has always struck me not only as smug divisive assholery, but total nonsense.

Liberalism is about redefining the world. Recreating. Changing reality. It is utopian. It is not the ideology of cold hard pragmatic realism.

You can't have it both ways. You can't be the idealistic dreamers and also the realists.

Unless you are just one of those people who subscribes to the infantile notion that your opponent is literally nothing more than wrong stupid doodoo heads.

[–]ownage516 23 ポイント24 ポイント  (7子コメント)

I saw that too. While the author has a pretty good understanding of Reddit better than most, it was the stuff like that shows he didn't understand all of it. If anything, /r/politics took a swing towards Clinton the days right after Sanders lost. Also the author linked a washington post article that was a very skewed explanation of gamergate. (Though I admit the whole gamergate situation has turned sour).

But everything else seemed spot on.

[–]MightyMorph 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (4子コメント)

There is a severe lack of understanding in how the subreddit is managed and utilized.

In essence, people have this rudimentary notion that just because it is a politics subreddit, it should be equally distributable towards both factions of the US political sphere. That republican and democratic views should be equally represented.

BUT in reality, just like most major subreddits , r/movies, r/funny, r/gifs, r/pics, the content of those subreddit is determined by their users actions. Just because r/movies don't feature asian movies as often, or r/funny doesn't have intellectual humor as often and other likewise subs cater to the most common denominator content, doesn't diminish the purpose of the subreddit.

SO when you have a subreddit and a website with a large majority being left-leaning. There is no reason to be suprised that content that is promoted and upvoted would reflect that.

r/politics, has never declared itself or tried to declare itself as a subreddit for neutral political discussion. Its simply a subreddit for the majority consumer base of reddit to post and discuss US based political news.

If you want neutral poltical subreddits there are a few of them on reddit as well: r/neutralnews, r/NeutralPolitics , r/neutralpoliticalhumor .

So this whole notion that r/politics is corrupted or wrong is absurd, especially considering just before Sanders decided to step aside, the sub was utilized by its majority users to promote anti-clinton content. And considering how anti-trump the reddit user base is, its not surprising that r/politics would reflect that. Especially considering all of the actions made by the Trump administration over the last few months.

[–]brgrss 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (3子コメント)

Take a screenshot of r/politics at any given time and there's a very good chance literally every single post is anti Trump bashing.

[–]wickedogg 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Definitely worthwhile to prove that Redditors who support trump are racist misogynists.

[–]Sinikal12 -4 ポイント-3 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Eh, I find the red pill to be quite useful and the ganergate movement made me realised how ugly the far left is in gaming media.

[–]Straus7945 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (4子コメント)

Pretty interesting stuff. Can't say I am surprised. I would definitely like to see this algorithm applied to other subreddits.

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

Can the information provide evidence of whether the following is in fact many different people or a small group of people with many accounts?

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

Can you do some sort of analysis to detect and show botting? If it can be proved the r/The_Donald is abusing reddit's mechanics then it will serve as justification to maybe ban or mitigate r/The_Donald's influence.

[–]Metabyte2 -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Biased sub selection, biased commentary. I'm sad at the amount of subs have turned to political shit and it sucks this one is headed the same way

[–]ShaunaDorothy [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

What kind of a madman doesn't want war with Russia? Imgur

[–]YRUObsessedWTrump [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

This is great. The biggest following are the LIBERALS the people that supposedly hate him HaHa. THEY ARE OBSESSED

[–]ButtGardener [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

They'd do the same for Hillary's online following but it all leads back to bought and paid for shills.

[–]thurken 29 ポイント30 ポイント  (5子コメント)

Interesting to see r/books in the middle of Hillary and Sanders and at the opposite of Trump.