from Hacker News

Reddit launches harassment crackdown

by adrianscott on 5/15/15, 1:37 PM with 133 comments

• by Karunamon on 5/15/15, 2:03 PM

  Given Reddit's already unequal application of the site rules (some people can shamelessly vote manipulate, others receive hellbans for merely following links), and the propensities for specific groups to treat mild disagreement as "harassment", this does not bode well.

  It gets really blatant if you've been on the site for any length of time. I really hope this doesn't kill the site, but it looks bad.

• by existencebox on 5/15/15, 2:21 PM

  This is a topic I'm legitimately curious about. 4chan existed in a form for a very long time such that (aside from any stated rules) harassment was ubiquitous (at least in /b). That being said, that same domain formed a basis for massive swaths of the internet community and culture we see today.

  In any place I've seen these sorts of gestures of "safe-ification", they seem to serve only to 1. be ineffective; for whatever moderation you have it's going to have edge cases and a time delay for enforcement. 2. Split the community, create _more_ (and often more subtler, now that it has to conform to some rulebook) harassment/drama between the split. 3. Drive away productive parts of the community, for any variety of reasons. (for me it's a mix of "I've seen this pattern before and don't like where it goes" and "I don't agree that trying to dictate social standards is the proper way.")

  Caveat, and I'm somewhat frustrated that I feel like I need to say this (whether that's at myself or the fear that I'll be jumped on if I don't), I was _VERY_ heavily bullied/harrassed for much of my childhood.

  I caveat as such to try and say that I don't hold this stance from a position of ignorance, but that if I hadn't interacted with bad actors in places that are frankly more insulated from real life (the internet) I would have never come to (yes, painful, but still VERY useful in hindsight) realizations about human interaction and my role in it.

  This rambled a bit, so tl;dr, Dealing with bad actors is how we learn to deal with bad actors, which is a _critical_ life skill. This even aside from that the strategy being applied does not have a successful history, from what I've seen. (I'm trying to avoid the slippery slope argument, although that's kinda implicit in my second conclusion, I'd rather hear what other people think on this concept of growth through pain, or if it's all in my head)

• by Vaskivo on 5/15/15, 2:09 PM

  I don't like it, but Reddit can do whatever it wants with it's platform. Reddit is not a "free speech platform", it is whatever it wants to be at any moment.

  In Portugal we have a saying that translates to something like this: "Who is not well/happy, should move to another place". And that's whats going to happen. Some users will go to another platforms.

  And, in the end, we'll always have the chans...

• by mhomde on 5/15/15, 2:15 PM

  On the surface it seems like a good thing. Taking a stance against the worst "systematic and continuing harassment" should help the most vitrolic cases. Some might argue that Reddit should be an "extreme free speech platform" and this obviously goes against it, but I'm not sure reddit sees itself that way.

  I think most people are afraid of the slippery slope and censorship if taken too far. Making Reddit "too political correct" would transform the current culture into something else. Many (or a loud minority) currently doesn't seem to trust Reddit to not do that. What makes things worse is people assume this is a "Monetization of a service"-story they've seen played out many times before with catastrophic results.

  In the end I guess it comes down to the execution and agenda.

• by adrianscott on 5/15/15, 2:00 PM

  Is this Reddit's Digg 4.0 moment?

• by mcantelon on 5/15/15, 2:23 PM

  "Think of the children" justifications for normalizing private sector censorship seem to be a contemporary ruling class focus. Pao's contribution is a smart career move.

• by return0 on 5/15/15, 2:20 PM

  Isn't reddit feeding off the entire nation of self-professed internet activists who are out to solve the world's injustices? These people are going to lose their sense of purpose if nobody is attacking them. Don't bite the hand that indirectly feeds you, reddit.

• by afeafbfba on 5/15/15, 2:53 PM

  Reddit is a propaganda site and has been for a while now. Many years ago, it was predominantly run by the users ( commenting and voting ). Now it's just a tool for admins and mods to push their agenda/views.

  They might as well get rid of the voting system. Reddit is a joke and the sooner it goes away the better.

• by forgottenpass on 5/15/15, 2:46 PM

  So, what's the driving force behind this?

  They're not doing it out of the good of their hearts, so I see three obvious possibilities: making the website a more attractive place to advertize, external pressure hurting their image (like that time they banned some subreddits only after being featured on CNN) or trying to appeal to more women. Did I miss anything?

  I assume it's some combination of the above leaning heavily towards advertizement. Considering the number of house ads I see them running, and the anecdotal things I've heard about advertizement sales on 4chan or other uncouth websites.

• by _greim_ on 5/15/15, 2:56 PM

  > Censorship should be the subreddit's decision.

  It's fun to watch parallels develop between reddit site operators versus subreddit moderators, and federal government versus state's rights. (For anyone not familiar with this long-running American political theme: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/States%27_rights)

• by edgarvaldes on 5/15/15, 2:34 PM

  I said it in another thread, I visit a subreddit with very strict moderation. Very strict. The place is wonderful for regulars and newcomers. It is healty and strong. One of the rules is:

  >If we find that you are active in any subreddits that promote hatred toward any particular group of individuals, your participation rights in this sub will be revoked.

  And another:

  "Mod abuse will not be tolerated"

  Those rules have worked for years.

• by hoopd on 5/15/15, 3:28 PM

  > It added that it defines harassment as "systematic and/or continued actions to torment or demean someone in a way that would make a reasonable person (1) conclude that reddit is not a safe platform to express their ideas or participate in the conversation, or (2) fear for their safety or the safety of those around them".

  In point (1) she basically just described how SRS operates...I doubt they'll be willing to use this to punish them, though.

  Speaing of SRS, maybe it's time the community starts asking A) how many reddit employees are involved with SRS and B) how many other subs the anonymous* SRS mods also moderate.

  *mostly anonymous. It's public knowledge one of their mods used to be a site admin.

• by techar on 5/15/15, 2:27 PM

  Has anyone heard of something called "ignore"? It is possible to do online.

• by revelation on 5/15/15, 2:30 PM

  Well, at least they are doing something. It seems like Reddit has tripled staff and VC money but has been doing exactly zero, nada, zilch. The site is the same, as are the ads, the downtimes, the loading problems, the ...

• by dmfdmf on 5/15/15, 2:41 PM

  I'd just like to point out the Pao and Reddit can do anything they want on their property and it is not censorship. Private parties cannot censor, only the government can censor which why the recent nationalization of the US Internet by the FCC is so dangerous for Free Speech. When the FCC comes out with their "Internet Anti-Harassment and Diversity Guidelines" that must be followed at the threat of shutting down your blog, that is true censorship and should not be tolerated.

• by cozuya on 5/15/15, 3:30 PM

  I can't agree with many of the comments here. I have a 7 year old reddit account, go there daily, am still subbed to many defaults, and I just haven't seen many of the accusations of terribleness and the inevitable downfall that have been professed here. In my experience, the growth of the site hasn't changed it much at all.. maybe more reposts to the front page but that's not a big surprise.

  It is what you make of it.

• by gdulli on 5/15/15, 2:19 PM

  It would be nice if they would have a spam/self-promotion crackdown.

• by forgottenpass on 5/15/15, 4:55 PM

  I see the submission title has been edited so that it's no longer the title the BBC used. I get what the social pressures are around here, but c'mon son.