
Reddit: A Nine-Year Case Study in Absentee Management - richardw
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2015-08-06/reddit-a-nine-year-case-study-in-absentee-management
======
zeteo
The article is terribly condescending towards Reddit's founders and
moderators. They have created and grown it to be in the top 10 of US websites.
The site is still growing very strongly. Yet they're presented as an immature
bunch who have no idea what they're doing and need "adult" supervision, e.g.

> Those cats can't run anything

> in retrospect, one flaw with [Condé Nast]’s hands-off approach was an
> assumption that Reddit’s founders would know when and how to ask for help.
> [...] Looking back [...] more hand-holding would have been a good idea.

Articles like this are a barely veiled attempt to put pressure on Condé Nast
and the other owners - Reddit needs to be instilled with a corporate, PR-
oriented mentality ASAP. Its spirit of "open discourse and peer-to-peer
learning" is incomprehensible to corporate America. On the other hand, the
impressive user base seems ripe for more aggressive monetization. So the old
deal has become inconvenient:

> During the courtship of Reddit [...] the company promised that if the deal
> went through, it would leave the founders alone to run the site with minimal
> interference

~~~
dobs
> The article is terribly condescending towards Reddit's founders and
> moderators.

Quibbling point, but I found the article fairly flattering toward moderators.
And as in the article, it's moderators who're often the quickest to call the
admins out for the burden their inaction places on us. A lot of what reddit is
now has been accomplished by moderators in spite of that burden.

------
Grue3
A well-managed site wouldn't grow on the Internet. Look at Tumblr, Reddit,
4chan, they became some of the biggest communities on the internet precisely
because they were "everything goes", whereas Something Awful or Metafilter
fell into obscurity (and SA became big in the first place when it was less
restrictive). The less you "manage", the more likely your site will end up in
Alexa top 100.

~~~
flanbiscuit
What happened to Something Awful? My friend was really into that site and
tried to get me to join but I ended up gravitating towards Reddit in the
end(around 2010/11)

~~~
GFK_of_xmaspast
That was absentee managment as well (lowtax basically disappeared for several
years).

~~~
leftnode
But it's still very well moderated.

~~~
TrevorJ
the Space Flight thread there in 600 pages of some of the coolest info I've
read in a while.

------
rndn
Reddit is pretty much a case study of upbringing without effective punishment.
In real life kids behave because they have skin in the game—if they misbehave,
they are not allowed ice cream. On the contrary, if you are banned from
reddit, you can simply reset your browser and create a new account.

I doubt you can fix reddit with a smarter design, because that won’t change
the troublemakers. To fix reddit, you would possibly have to profoundly change
the way our civilization socializes the young, remove inequality and provide
more psychological support. Or you would have to build a better reputation
system and use that for sorting, but that’s likely going to be incompatible
with anonymity and it won’t be as fun.

~~~
fulafel
Upbrining without punishment definitely is definitely possible and practiced
semi widely (google around). Punishment is a pretty bad way to address
misbehaviour.

~~~
belenos46
Yeah, says everyone except every reputable psychologist ever, and any parent
who hasn't raised an out of control little monster of a child.

Negative reinforcement works better than any other form of reinforcement,
except when paired with positive reinforcement for desired behaviors, just
like innumerable studies and common goddamned sense tell you.

~~~
thekingofspain
A quick google informs me that punishment != negative reinforcement.

~~~
rndn
The terminology is a bit weird: Positive vs. negative means presenting a
stimulus vs. removing it. Reinforcement means increasing the frequency of a
reaction and punishment means decreasing it. You have to logically conclude,
whether the presented or removed stimulus is nice or unpleasant. Here is an
overview:

    
    
        positive reinforcement:  presenting nice stimulus to increase frequency of behavior
        negative reinforcement:  removing unpleasant stimulus to increase frequency of behavior
        positive punishment:  presenting unpleasant stimulus to decrease frequency of behavior
        negative punishment:  removing nice stimulus to decrease frequency of behavior
    

The great confusion stems from the fact that in common English language, with
punishment we mean both _increasing good_ behavior and _reducing bad_
behavior, whilst in classical conditioning terms, punishment always refers to
reducing the frequency of a certain behavior.

------
boldpanda
As a Reddit user and advertiser, I was disappointed when they doubled their ad
CPM's in June without notice to advertisers (as mentioned in the article).

I can understand incrementally increasing the price with demand, but doubling
the cost of CPM's without notice is a big fuck you to advertisers.

Now they're more expensive than Facebook and with less targeting capability
and you can't change or edit your ads once their live.

~~~
puranjay
Question: What has been your experience with Reddit ads? I've heard that they
are barely profitable for anyone save a few niche industries.

~~~
tempVariable
I'm not not parent, but - I've purchased a few time-blocks for a different
campaigns over last few years and it brought in significant traffic, a bit
more conversions, but despite being able to target a subreddit, it is still
hard to get your money's worth if you are promoting a brick and mortar store.
Unless that store offers tangible goods sold online as well. Location
constrained and in-person transaction type of services saw less of a bump in
revenue. That is probably true for online advertising overall. My 2 cents

------
Fede_V
Very interesting article. There was a data viz (gender vs visits) that was
needlessly flashy, when a simple x-y scatter would have been more clear.

One part struck me though:

Erwin sees evidence of it already, pointing to the recent debut of Upvoted, a
Reddit podcast delving into the site’s most compelling stories. “Reddit is
very much trying to establish itself as a curator of its own content and take
back some of that space from BuzzFeed,” Erwin says.

The 'content' on Reddit is made by its users. Sure, it's annoying when
Buzzfeed packages it up into an article and sells it for clicks (though if you
visit Buzzfeed it's your own fault) but it does not belong to anyone.

Reddit, by itself, is an empty vessel - its only value is in retaining its
creative users and staying user friendly enough that those users keep drawing
more and more people in. The vessel itself is completely worthless. As much as
it sucks to have to cater to the whims of the users, they represent the only
real value Reddit has.

I will be watching very closely to see how the new admins get rid of the truly
toxic subreddits, while still retaining the culture of openness and anonymity.
It is a very difficult tightrope walk.

~~~
impostervt
According to Reddit's user agreement, you own content you submit, but you give
Reddit a "do whatever you want with it, even to make money off of it" license.

[https://www.reddit.com/help/useragreement#p_17](https://www.reddit.com/help/useragreement#p_17)

~~~
mahouse
Is it me or this is stupid? I mean, this is the digital world, you can make as
many copies as you want, so if you give them a licence to whatever they want
with it, what are your options after submitting something?

~~~
nadams
You could stamp everyone of your posts with a CC-NC license. Since the content
is yours - I don't think they can magically wave the CC-NC license on the
basis that you uploaded it to their site.

~~~
ianlevesque
IANAL but if you agreed to their terms and uploaded something then you've
relicensed it to them. This is the same as those misguided souls posting
copyright notices under their Facebook messages.

~~~
nadams
I mean TOS, EULAs etc only go so far. If you think they are the word of god -
then I'll create a TOS on my site that says for every page view you agree to
pay me $X. Then when I sue you to get the money - any judge who isn't taking
mind altering drugs should throw it out.

Interestingly enough Apple also had their Safari EULA state that you couldn't
install it on a PC [1]. Obviously it was never brought to court - but still
I'm sure thousands of people violated the EULA.

My take is yes - someone who operates a website/service can blanket content
you upload unless you explicitly state otherwise. So here is a hypothetical
question - you own the copyright of the material in question. Reddit makes a
copy of your reddit post for their daily feed or something - could you send a
DMCA removal request? I'm sure you would say no because of the TOS - but don't
you own the original copyright?

> This is the same as those misguided souls posting copyright notices under
> their Facebook messages.

And from what I read basically Facebook has the ability to use public
posts/pictures - which makes total sense (posting the copyright notice only
makes you look like a fool). If you don't want them to use it - adjust your
privacy settings.

Here is an example of a ridiculous TOS [2].

> Permission is granted to freely print, unmodified, up to 200 copies

How do you know how many I printed? Perhaps I scanned copies - would those be
considered prints?

[1] [http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/10-ridiculous-eula-clauses-
agre...](http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/10-ridiculous-eula-clauses-agreed/)

[2]
[http://www.templetons.com/brad/copymyths.html](http://www.templetons.com/brad/copymyths.html)

------
bittercynic
The criticism of the aesthetic of the reddit homepage is misguided. By not
following current trends in web design, reddit has stronger credibility as a
free-for-all where you might find interesting material.

If you want content curated by editors who are directed by big money, there
are a million other sites for that.

~~~
krapp
I've never understood the implication that a simple layout necessarily
correlates to better content. Is it because sites that don't look modern evoke
a sense of nostalgia for the less corporate "old" web? Is it just hipsterism?
Clever marketing on Reddit's part?

It comes up on HN too, whenever someone complains about the awkward layout,
there are worries that somehow making the site look better or perform better
will degrade the culture.

~~~
bittercynic
The current style (as I interpret it) is to have a very minimal amount of
text, edge-to-edge images, and for the designer to control the user's
experience very closely. Sometimes this is great! I think DigitalOcean's
design works perfectly, and is a positive example of following current trends.

One of the main appeals of reddit is that it's a free-for-all, and the current
design reflects that. If you're looking for chaos, reddit looks pretty good,
and many of us do like some chaos from time to time.

------
todayiamme
"""James Erwin, a Reddit moderator of several subreddits including r/history,
argues that Reddit’s unwillingness over the years to provide strong, hands-on
leadership to the site’s community is at the heart of the company’s lackluster
business performance. Without a firm editorial grip, the flourishing of
disreputable subreddits opened the door for BuzzFeed, the Huffington Post, and
others, which sift through Reddit content and repackage it to advertisers in
more sanitized conditions. “Reddit is watching other people eat its lunch,”
Erwin says."""

I think this loses the magical thing Reddit has - extremely strong intent
signals from millions of people who are constantly voting on these items.

An interesting route to monetisation for Reddit would be divorcing the hive
mind from the more passive viewers. There are probably a sizeable number of
people who really don't care about the discussions / community interactivity
element within Reddit and don't even possess accounts. What if Reddit created
an independent app which used the live data from all of these sub-reddit
upvotes, comments, (sentiment analysis?) and the rate at which something got
picked up to do their "buzzfeed"-esque curation? Reddit's repackaging would
create that neutral advertising-safe space, which could be successfully
monetised in different ways.

An example of this would be say a deep-connect with content providers like
Netflix and Hulu as well as whatever sub-reddits exist for movies, where they
have a curated, passive viewing experience of say short-movies culled from a
combination of Youtube, Vimeo, and Netflix to create a unique mix that
wouldn't exist anywhere else. This would create a constantly changing, dynamic
"TV-like" experience. Some viewers would like to engage around what they've
watched and then Reddit could close the loop and get more data. I'm sure there
are other interesting things to do with all of the photos they have in their
dataset. As well all the articles and user-submitted content. (a better
Flipboard type app?)

Reddit the company doesn't have to fight with reddit the chaotic force. They
can just harness and use it to achieve a scale of manual curation no one has
ever attempted before. It could become something quite special.

~~~
seiji
All the weirdness from Reddit seems to come from historically mixing the CEO
role with the Community Manager role. There should be an entire department
_only_ dealing with on-site issues and that department should have absolute
authority. Reddit grew from a 2 person company where everybody did everything,
but did it actually grow up once it got bigger? Reddit has had a valley golden
child touch since the beginning, so normal company growth patterns haven't
always happened where would you expect in the lifecycle of a company because
"lol reddit—we're differunt!"

Having the CEO be at the mercy of _users_ in a multi-million-user fractured
community is like having Tim Cook be the top level escalation for Apple tech
support. Sure, the users may love it, but it's not sustainable for a company.
Give the users an outlet for their rage and moderation problems, but don't
touch the toxic waste personally.

~~~
todayiamme
What I'm trying to say is that they don't even have to touch that entire
"community" thing. It's a massive headache and it's better to leave it alone
than try to whip it into something monetisable. They can treat it as a loss-
leader, extract the data it generates, and spin-off revenue generating assets
from it.

~~~
seiji
Yes, that is one of the dozen new (almost _too_ obvious) things it seems would
be a slam dunk for them.

If people are stealing your content, reformatting it, and just placing ads
around it, you sure as heck can do that yourself. Sprinkle some magic app dust
around it and -bam- drive buzzfeed out of business, which I think is what we
all truly want (except for some clueless VCs who value buzzfeed at billions of
dollars [ _vomit_ ]).

------
rabbyte
If this article is a case study, it's only conducting research on the business
challenge and ignores the societal impact. Reddit community members are
treated as incidental targets for advertisers and the study observes the
difficulty in marketing a brand to an environment hostile to brand messaging.

The article serves the intended readership well, and I found many of its
points interesting, but it feels hollow to not mention that there is more to
learn here. I'm left feeling like the take away is that creating a safer
environment for advertisers is the same as creating a safer and healthier
community but that necessarily excludes a kind of community; one that exists
regardless of what Reddit does and one that is largely unserved by the
corporate web. Communities that avoid mainstream, are suspicious of money's
affect on authenticity. It's unruly, bad behavior too, but there are several
ways you can slice that. Shaping it to fit a neutral channel that is friendly
to advertisers is only one way.

------
mhomde
Community dynamics is incredibly hard, managing it under growth and after a
certain threshold even more so, and radical change is almost impossible.

It's easy to say that someone has been too lax or too firm but it's such a
complex issue. It's really hard to force a community in certain direction.
It's more about sowing the seeds with tools and ux and less about policies and
rules... and then apply a light touch help it develop in the direction you
want.

There's also a question of what the ultimate goal is. What's best for the most
users? For making the most money? The biggest median satisfaction? To fulfill
some aspirational teneth?

I think one of Reddit's fundamental problems at this size is that it is grown
on the seeds of anonymity, user moderators and upvotes/downvotes.

It has served them well for a long time but chaos always ensues when a
community reaches a certain threshold, and more pressure needs to be applied
to keep it in check (if that's what you want)

Upvotes/Downvotes is a blunt tool and threads easily changes into who agrees
with whom rather than promoting thoughtful comments.

User anonymity is great, but requires features around it at a certain size. A
country has borders to keep criminals away and community needs a way to keep
trolls at bay. If you just can create another account what's the problem with
being a troll? One remedy might be a smarter karma system where more
visibility is given to users that's posted interesting content, kinda lika
slashdot.

User moderators are great when it works, like in some channels. But it's also
a source of petty power struggles and dictators defending their fiefdoms.
Reddit of course benefits tremendously from the work the "power" incentivizes
these moderators do for free, but I keep wondering if at a certain size there
needs to be more automation and checks and balances to avoid user moderators
becoming destructive or slanted and put too much focus on the meta. Then again
maybe some subreddits _should_ be biased and let the mods rule as their will.
It's a little weird though for big general subreddits for things like news and
countries.

Anyway, Reddit is probably too much set in it's way to enact radical change
without the users revolting, and there isn't proof that the model doesn't
work, just that it has its problem, as all models probably would.

As I said, community dynamics are complicated. Will be interesting to follow
Reddit going forward.

------
silverlake
Who ran Reddit between 2009, when Alexis and Steve left, to whenever Yishan
became CEO?

~~~
kemitche
Erik Martin (hueypriest) was general manager during that time.

