everybody on ilx complains about reddit

Not clicking anything with jailbait or upskirts in url, btw.

^^^

he posted in reddit that one of his "talking points" was that gawker posts upskirts. Lol

― (♥___♥) (roxymuzak), Wednesday, October 17, 2012 2:12 AM (7 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

where did he post this btw??

[sometimes i forget that other people have "real jobs"]

I could probably explain my way out of it and say it was research, but then they're going to find that Pete Townshend playlist I've got on Spotify….

Ugh

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-19975375

The issue drew questions over Reddit's policy of not blocking content which, while not technically illegal, would be considered by many as unacceptable.

In a posting made to a private area of the site for moderators and administrators, Mr Wong described the situation as "a bit of a pickle".

Continue reading the main story
“
Start Quote

We chose to recognise that opponents have the right to criticise us, to expose us, to tell a story about us”

Yishan Wong
Reddit
"There sure has been a lot of trouble lately for Reddit, and I'd like to talk about about that before I nip off for a spot of tea," he wrote.

He went on to add: "We know that some will not agree with us.

"We also think that if someday, in the far future, we do become a universal platform for human discourse, it would not do if in our youth, we decided to censor things simply because they were distasteful."

However, Mr Wong - who used to be an engineer at Facebook - said the website would continue to enforce a policy to not allow "doxxing", a term given to the process of outing a member by posting personal details online.

"We will ban the posting of personal information, because it incites violence and harassment against specific individuals," Mr Wong said.

He blamed past instances of misguided "witch-hunts" for this rule.

and ugh at the formatting of that quote, sorry.

a bit of a pickle

newsie wewsie, blood pudding, fat arsed girls etc. etc.

"We also think that if someday, in the far future, we do become a universal platform for human discourse, it would not do if in our youth, we decided to censor things simply because they were distasteful."

Reddit's CEO is right. When our space progeny look back on our society they'll be thankful Reddit upheld man's inalienable right to sneak undie pics of teen girls in public.

i know i have no personal interest in uploading my consciousness to reddit.reality if all the types of porn arent represented

if the universal platform for human discourse involves upvotes and 'karma' then i guess i'll be living in a remote cave somewhere

[votes down]

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/9287652/images/gifs/wewerewrong.jpg

even their PR campaigns have to have nips in them

the "talking points" comment is in this comment thread: http://www.reddit.com/r/pointandclick/comments/11dkn9/tea_break_escape/c6n1800

there was a lot of talking about gawker/upskirts i that thread so i mistakenly thought he was talking about that, but on rereading he is talking about gawker posting hulk hogan's sex tape?

Hulk Hogan and his girl are adults, if I'm not mistaken.

did they even post it or just allude to it

i dont usually ask such things but i really dont want to google on the subject. haw

either Gawker or Jezebel posted an edited version of it IIRC

They had highly-edited segments, I believe, just enough to insinuate the acts going on and hear conversation

gawker is gross. reddit is grosser.

Feel like gawker has a lot of things for different people, much like reddit, but in the end the angle is snarkiness or humor on gawker and it's usually meta in some way (coaching celebrities on upskirt?) but reddit is the pure source of content

reddit isn't a pure source of content, it's mostly shared/re-shared content from other sites, blogs, etc

yes, a vast majority is just posted links

ironic perversion is still perverse

present-day gawker is odd. sometimes it feels like browsing through an copy of celebrity skin and finding essays by chris hedges and arundhati roy or something...

ok I meant impure content, like upskirt pics

Again, if Redditors want to judge Gawker by picking out the worst aspects of the site, there is probably stuff far far worse on Reddit.

you know, like creepshots

i mean the 2 big differences btw reddit creepshots and gawker publishing celeb sex tapes that seem to get lost on reddit are 1) the distinction between public figures & private citizens (or generally between "news" and "not news") and 2) gawker writers publish this stuff under their irl names

distinction 1 is "real" but arguable i guess, theres a legal distinction and it seems to have been more or less settled in the court of public opinion anyway

distinction 2 strikes me as more important and yet even more ignored

creepshots, as horrible as it is, is still not the worst on reddit

let's be real,reddit vs gawker it's all moving chairs around on the titanic

that and gawker publishes this as an umbrella entity, whereas reddit as a whole tries to claim they're just a host for content and that the tone of the site isn't particularly influenced by any specific individual's interests

a dox on both your houses

ironic perversion is still perverse

― Mordy, Wednesday, October 17, 2012 12:07 PM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

doubly perverse one might say *steeples fingers*

One of these sites is admittedly gossip trash, the other THE DIGITALLY LIBERATED FUTURE OF MANKIND.

i kind of agree with tea-drinking reddit dude that it should let its creep flag fly

but at the same time i think their attitude to creeps getting exposed should be a big shrug.

gawker doesnt really consider itself gossip trash is the thing tho

another tension is between reddit's claim as 'the front page of the internet' where even obama has spent time on vs. the awful awful content it hosts

redditors have a place to go if they really want to dabble in this stuff, it's called 4chan

haha who is "gawker" there xp

just the collective gawker, you know

I think a lot of people who visit reddit don't think of themselves as really creepy either, and a fair portion probably don't give a shit about this, just the ones involved in the site politics

gawker is an important satirical commentary and worthy of interest, just ask max's alma mater's facebook page

distinction 2 is problematic to me. first off, plenty of ppl on reddit (ok, ppl on the tech communities that are all i see of it) don't hide behind anonymity. like they don't use full real names, but you can figure them out v. quick from context, and some people do use full real names.

second, plenty of ppl have chosen not to use real names for potentially good reason historically, and perhaps in the current day. i don't think there's something especially noble about going under your real name, and i don't think that it's at all hard-and-fast that if you aren't comfortable with something being tied to your real name then you shouldn't post it. there was a huge, huge flap over g+'s "real names" policy that dealt with lots of this quite well. i mean, ffs, gawker even goes out of its way to provide burner accounts to its commentators.

so yes, this distinguishes, e.g., ac from mb. but i think it is more important that one writes newsish articles for a newsish publication and the other moderated /r/hitler.

2) gawker writers publish this stuff under their irl names

― max, Wednesday, October 17, 2012 11:09 AM (15 minutes ago)

funny thing is that the first time I saw your byline, my initial thought was "that's got to be a pseudonym"

hahaha yeah a lot of people still assume it is ~~who will dox me~~

gawker is an organization with paid contributors who may or may not have editorial direction from the top down

unless Nick Denton tells them to put sharpies in their butts, I don't think the sites are really comparable

at a certain point treating this beef as between the collective entities of "gawker" and "reddit" breaks down for me, but i can't really articulate why.

distinction 2 is problematic to me. first off, plenty of ppl on reddit (ok, ppl on the tech communities that are all i see of it) don't hide behind anonymity. like they don't use full real names, but you can figure them out v. quick from context, and some people do use full real names.

second, plenty of ppl have chosen not to use real names for potentially good reason historically, and perhaps in the current day. i don't think there's something especially noble about going under your real name, and i don't think that it's at all hard-and-fast that if you aren't comfortable with something being tied to your real name then you shouldn't post it. there was a huge, huge flap over g+'s "real names" policy that dealt with lots of this quite well. i mean, ffs, gawker even goes out of its way to provide burner accounts to its commentators.

so yes, this distinguishes, e.g., ac from mb. but i think it is more important that one writes newsish articles for a newsish publication and the other moderated /r/hitler.

― s.clover, Wednesday, October 17, 2012 12:18 PM (11 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

im not distinguishing between *reddit as a whole* and *gawker* just between */r/creepshots* and *hulk hogans sex tape* or maybe better between violentacrez and adrian w/r/t to charges of hypocrisy