
Changes to our content policy, our board, and where we’re going from here - ComodoHacker
https://old.reddit.com/r/announcements/comments/gxas21/upcoming_changes_to_our_content_policy_our_board/
======
kitsune_
Ellen K. Pao was right all along. Also if the replies in here are
representative of Silicon Valley as a whole, damn. It just reminds me of the
stereotypical too-smart-for-their-own-good hacker who is prone to making
sweeping generalisations and extrapolations in domains that lie outside of
their own experience or expertise. I know I'm prone to this and I've met a lot
of arrogant smart people who fall into this category. I really think that
there is an empathy problem here. Sometimes we just need to shut up and listen
instead of looking at the world in binary terms.

~~~
vincentmarle
> Also if the replies in here are representative of Silicon Valley as a whole,
> damn.

Unbelievable indeed. When is HN going to come out with their anti hate policy?

~~~
manigandham
The HN guidelines are already sufficient:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)

------
Darmody
I blocked Reddit on my computer but I decided to unlock it temporarily to read
this.

"u/kn0thing has resigned from our board to fill his seat with a Black
candidate"

Now I regret it. I despise this kind of actions taken based on the colour of
the skin/nationality/ethnicity/religion.

~~~
uniqueid

        > I despise this kind of actions taken 
        > based on the colour of the skin
    

Are you sure you aren't applying a rule, on this occasion, without thinking it
through? Skin-colour is relevant to the job here: it's a guarantee that the
board member will have first-hand experience dealing with the issues Alexis
thinks Reddit has mishandled.

~~~
fakename11
Not necessarily guaranteed, not every person with a certain skin color has
experienced the same thing... but you can probably find someone that has if
that is what you are selecting for.

~~~
uniqueid
True. I actually considered clarifying that. But if we're being pragmatic, the
chances are awfully good that a new "black" board member _will_ understand the
issues.

Have to say, unless the board member is also a prickly character, there's a
high likelihood, even with an understanding, that he or she won't really rock
the boat anyways.

------
panpanna
About time. It is almost impossible to browse the front page without seeing
some hateful content.

And I am not talking about the political stuff. You can upload video of a
random dude getting beaten to death, make some absurd claims like "the guy is
a pedophile caught in the act" and watch the hateful comments roll in.

Basically, you can make any claims and the ones that keep people's blood
boiling seems very popular way of getting clicks and upvotes.

~~~
PunchTornado
maybe you should unsubscribe from subs you don't like. plenty of people like
violent subs, like justicesurved or others.

~~~
panpanna
Mate I got news for you:

they are getting so popular they are all over the front page.

I sometimes wonder if Reddit has resulted in a generation completely unable of
critical thinking.

~~~
PunchTornado
I don't understand what you mean by frontpage. it is made only from posts from
subs you subscribed to. if you don't like it, unsubscribe.

or the thing that bothers you is that other people like it and want to see it

~~~
zo1
I get /r/politics all the time recommended to me, filled with hateful content.
I can't "block" it even though I've looked.

~~~
DuskStar
old.reddit.com is the only way to reddit.

------
politelemon
Sadly Reddit's announcements have a long history of verbosity, with little to
no action taken afterwards. It's a long post but you'll notice very little in
the way of actual measurable goals.

The comments in that thread are very telling of how Reddit's admins have
chosen to wring their hands, or lament over their lack of involvement in the
past rather than address issues, policies or tools.

------
KKPMW
This whole post is weird. Based on the tone they seem to think they are
combating racism. But really the CEO of a company just announced that they are
looking for a new candidate. Requirements? - No particular requirements,
except having the right skin color.

~~~
kitsune_
Your implied reverse-racism argument just doesn't hold. Are you telling me
that there are no capable African-Americans who could fill that board
position? If not, the what are you arguing? That increasing the representation
of historically oppressed minority groups is bad?

~~~
ALittleLight
It seems a bit silly to say "reverse racism" doesn't hold when race is an
explicit criteria for the job. Maybe this is still net positive for all the
good that could come out of it, but clearly racist to say certain races need
not apply.

Imagine I'm selling clothes to upper middle class people in Iowa and someone
applies to be a salesman or a general manager. "Oh sorry, I'm really looking
for a white person here because I feel we've mismanaged our relationship to
white consumers in the past." That seems like pretty clear cut racism to me. I
don't see we should apply different logic just because the races or jobs are
different.

~~~
8note
But people of all races are required to know white people culture to attend to
our needs.

In the situation you give, being white offers no special qualifications.

~~~
manigandham
Culture is not race or skin color, nor dependent on them.

------
high_derivative
To me, it seems like a combination of childish-authoritarian beliefs that the
world will change for the better once, and only once, you stop anyone from
saying anything controversial at all. Once nobody is able to disagree, bad
things won't exist any more.

~~~
trianglem
It’s all about doing what you can when you can. Please take this acerbic,
hyperbolic attitude somewhere else.

~~~
high_derivative
I hope the irony is not lost on you when you ask me to leave this platform for
disagreeing with you.

~~~
knolax
I hope you realize the irony of the fact that you're posting on a forum much
more heavily moderated than Reddit.

------
namelosw
I'm not sure if this is good or bad. Maybe time will tell.

One thing popped up in my mind was YouTube demonetized a lot of videos that
are not 'family-friendly', and eventually destroyed a lot of great content
creators.

------
audessuscest
I deleted my reddit account. Reddit is becoming an editorialised website where
people propose content, slowly but surely. Promoting sub they entirely control
and moderate heavily. I used to visit reddit daily for more than a decade.
Reddit is dead to me.

------
merricksb
Big discussion earlier:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23430575](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23430575)

------
milsorgen
Reddit was infinitely more valuable (to the user) when it lead a hands on
approach. I understand somethings should and must be removed from the platform
but it is undoubtedly an echo chamber, almost unparalleled at this point. It's
value to provide viewpoint, insight and discussion is almost nonexistent at
this point. This announcement certainly doesn't bode well for anyone hoping to
find it a platform that fosters better discussion.

~~~
uniqueid

        > it is undoubtedly an echo chamber, almost unparalleled 
        > at this point.
    

What does "unparalleled" mean here? It sounds melodramatic.

~~~
pensatoio
Hard to find a worse or larger echo chamber than Reddit, no? Seems like a good
use of “unparalleled” to me.

------
flyinglizard
This week the NYT apologized[0] for publishing an op-ed[1] from a Republican
senator which stated something (using the military to restore civil order)
which has broad - if not majority - support among Americans[2]. Some
columnists apologetically said that giving Sen. Tom Cotton a stage could be
justified on the basis of giving that to other enemies of the US in the past,
such as Iran and the Taliban[3].

It seems like in the USA circa 2020 there's a pretty narrow legitimate range
of opinions, stepping out of which immediately earns you *cist expletives.

[0] [https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/04/business/new-york-
times-o...](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/04/business/new-york-times-op-ed-
cotton.html)

[1] [https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/03/opinion/tom-cotton-
protes...](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/03/opinion/tom-cotton-protests-
military.html)

[2]
[https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicholasreimann/2020/06/02/58-o...](https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicholasreimann/2020/06/02/58-of-
voters-support-using-military-to-help-police-control-protests-poll-
finds/#76593f332417)

[3] [https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/04/opinion/tom-cotton-op-
ed-...](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/04/opinion/tom-cotton-op-ed-new-york-
times.html)

~~~
Traster
Why are you mis-representing what the NYT did? Are you just hoping people
don't read your citations. From your citation

> For example, the published piece presents as facts assertions about the role
> of “cadres of left-wing radicals like antifa”; in fact, those allegations
> have not been substantiated and have been widely questioned. Editors should
> have sought further corroboration of those assertions, or removed them from
> the piece. The assertion that police officers “bore the brunt” of the
> violence is an overstatement that should have been challenged. The essay
> also includes a reference to a “constitutional duty” that was intended as a
> paraphrase; it should not have been rendered as a quotation.

The NYT didn't apologize for publishing an Op-Ed from a Senator. It apologized
for doing it's job badly and publishing materially false statements as fact.

It's worth noting that Senator Cotton went on to publicly call for the extra
judicial killing of protestors. Which, if we're really so concerned about
legitimate opinions, I would suggest murdering protestors would have more of a
chilling effect than choosing not to publish their op-eds.

~~~
hackissimo123
> It apologized for doing it's job badly and publishing materially false
> statements as fact.

Does that mean they'll also be apologising for The 1619 Project?

