Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Here's the problem: thedonald is a subreddit full of both real trump supporters, AND trolls who're acting surreptitiously to rile up the real supporters and piss off everyone else; which is also spilling over and affecting other parts of reddit, including /all.

The problem for the reddit admins is how to control and contain it and punish the trolls without affecting real people, or being overly censurous.

So for someone who's basically being sniped at by hundreds of guerilla warriors who can make thousands of other people dance as their puppets, it's not surprising they'd reach for a similar tool in frustration when attacked directly, wrongly and frivolously.




They shouldn't though, if they want to be credible and the site they own/market. Now this is lost.


Was reddit ever really credible?


They made sure in the media they are.


imo he's gained credibility


"I don't care what he did so long as it was against those I disagree with."


You're thinking too shallow. :)

It took people harrassing him personally, and at scale, for him to snap. And even then he did not ban anyone, but did what amounts to a prank. And even then he did not hide it, but owned it and apologized.

At every turn of this he showed himself to be a greater man than most of us.


Banning them would have been better.

Silently editing their comments shows that reddit has very poor data management practices. It shouldn't be possible for the CEO to edit content like that.


There's no forum where the people running it don't have trivially easy access to do what he did. The point is that he has clearly shown what kind of thing it takes to push him that far, and it's clearly not done trivially.

E: I'm trying to say, your perspective is off. Reddit is an internet humor place. Just because it's big enough to have a CEO doesn't mean it's suddenly run with all the seriousness and as tight as a bank.


Thats a fair comment, but my point about calling this a prank being absolute BS still stands...


[flagged]


I dont mind that you reply to multi-with-one....

Sure, I am agitated - but given that if anyone who has ever worked for me on any system who had root access to a publicly used (by many millions of people) changed content from the ACTUAL USERBASE based on their ego being hurt, they would be fired on the spot. A statement would be made saying that we are assessing our data-access policies and auditing who has access to what.

You state I am "over reacting" but are you not aware that the entire premise of credibility in data driven companies is based on access to data? Have you ever been through ANY audits ever?

I am going to make a simple foundational audit question to you:

"Who has access to the financial information of the company"

"Well, our VP of IT, the CFO, the CEO are the only three"

So... this CEO of reddit has been known to abuse his power in his own companies product to edit the contents of that product (userbase comments with interests in various topics which is a sellable marketing package)....

So... whos to say if he reacts like this that he wont edit the financials/user-base counts/whatever he has access to if he isnt happy with the data?????

THIS IS A FUNDAMENTAL trust issue with him... to blow it off as a prank is abhorrent.

Does this not make sense?


reddit is not a bank, it is an internet humor forum where sometimes people also talk about the real world

he edited posts that said "fuck you" to him

you're overreacting

you can take this if you like, or disagree, i don't care to discuss it further

this is one of the least significant possible hills to make a stand and die on :v


While I expect this issue to blow over, you are right that defending the CEO's actions by saying he was "frustrated" or it was a prank or whatever else is ridiculous. Imagine the CEO of Google editing YouTube comments.

I don't know if these analogies are totally apt or not, though; it sounds like the CEO here is also a moderator of a forum and may have edit privileges by virtue of that; it's not like he's executing SQL queries to rewrite the comments in place, I assume, he's just abusing "editorial" powers in pretty much the worst way possible (quietly changing content to say the opposite).


> I assume, he's just abusing "editorial" powers in pretty much the worst way possible

The platform shouldn't provide editorial powers that allow you to edit others comments. Removal of comments and banning of users is sufficient. There's no legitimate need to have that functionality built it.


> You're highly agitated and not thinking clearly it seems. Try and do whatever helps you calm down normally.

This was unnecessary and condescending, and there's no call for it.


It was a simple fact and he admitted himself it was. Though, if you know of a more graceful way to communicate this, please let me know.


>but did what amounts to a prank.

This is the stupidest comment I have read.

"Don't worry bro, I only shot you as a prank!"

"Don't worry bro, I only slept with your wife as a prank!"

This isa CEO of an incredibly far reaching site who was personally EDITING the posts of users on his site because his ego was hurt.

This is ridiculous!!!


"Don't worry bro, I only shot you as a prank!"

Have you ever heard of "false equivalence"?


"I just committed a mass edit on posts on one of the largest public forums on the internet with 100's of millions of users who want to share their perspective and opinions - where that site I did these edits on is where I am CEO -- and I was upset, within the context of how my ego was hurt -- but it was just a prank"

"IT WAS A PRANK BRO"

You need to take some time to evaluate you're understanding of "false" equivalence.

/u/spez is falsely equating his actions with a "prank"


>> And even then he did not hide it, but owned it and apologized.

Only after he got.


Lets hope Zuckerberg doesn't snap then, but I'm sure "dumb fucks"* will find an apology for that too.

*his words, not mine


As long as he follows up in the same mature manner, it'll be unfortunate, but forgivable. :)

Also, calling someone a dumbfuck and pretending you didn't just do that because it's "just a quote" is not the greatest a look a person can aim for. ;)


I'm not even sure who he's quoting as calling "dumb fucks"


Mark Zuckerburg, referring to Facebook users.

http://www.businessinsider.com/embarrassing-and-damaging-zuc...


> *his words, not mine

Who's words?



The people he did this to were jabbing him in the eye with a sharp stick because reddit took action against them for falsley accusing people of being pedophiles.

His action was wrong. But it was provoked.


That was my point with comments like "imo he's gained credibility"

There are other comments celebrating what he did because it was again /r/the_donald "trolls."

Lot's of people don't care what actions you take so long as its against a group/individual that they don't like. That is short sighted thinking IMO.


I think the distinction is behavior, not "people they don't like". Witch hunts are against the guidelines of reddit; that's not a secret. Whether you support Trump or not isn't relevant, if you're on a witch hunt. Likewise, posting personal information has, from almost the very beginning of reddit, been the one cardinal sin. The sin that'll get you banned or a subreddit closed down.

That's what spez was responding to. He did it in a terribly immature way that I could never condone (unless it were really funny, like this, in which case, I think it's hilarious). But, it was not a random "I don't like this group" situation, and to frame it that way is to manipulate the narrative. The behavior in question was a witch hunt, and against reddit rules; the witch hunt started because a subreddit was banned for posting (tons of!) personal information and launching a witch hunt against a random restaurant and bar and its owners. Again, that's clearly against reddit rules. Those rules are reasonable, and if someone doesn't like them, they should take their shit elsewhere.

It's not about not liking The_Donald. Nobody likes The_Donald, but reddit has always been more than fair in dealing with all of their bullshit; the vote brigades (against reddit rules), the orchestrated abuse of other subs and moderators and users, etc. Large swaths of them probably should have been banned months ago. But, Steve has always been slow to ban. Probably to a fault. When you fail to ban folks like this you breed a community of people like this, who feel entitled to be abusive without response.


You're describing a seemingly natural human reaction. However - the CEO shouldn't be reacting like this - he needs a PR team to spin it however he wants to spin it - but he shouldnt single-handedly, with one action, literally destroy any semblance of credibility the 8th largest site in the US even has.

FB was allowing employees to simply READ any comments/posts/PMs between users and recall what a shitstorm that was... but now imagine if Zuck was personally freaking editing posts about him? (or if he had a team of ppl doing it for him and then admitting to it/bragging about it on corp comms???)

/u/spez may have truly done a really big hit to reddits future.

Can we get @DANG's opinion?


> /u/spez may have truly done a really big hit to reddits future.

Oh man, if Reddit takes a stand and says "we're not going to treat trolls and non-trolls the same anymore", I would feel a ton better about spending time there.


How does one define a troll vs. a non-troll?

You also have to consider that, as incredibly ridiculous and batshit crazy as it is, a high percentage of the /r/pizzagate people 100% believe it's true and that they're uncovering a massive criminal ring.


> Here's the problem: thedonald is a subreddit full of both real trump supporters, AND trolls who're acting surreptitiously to rile up the real supporters and piss off everyone else

Shouldn't the mods clean up after the trolls who don't abide by the subreddit rules? If a post stays up for days, it is safe to assume the mods condone it whether it was posted by a 'troll' or a 'real person' - this goes for any subreddit.


There's a site that gives you a thing you can use to show deleted posts in reddit threads, called uneddit.com

Try it on thedonald.


I don't quite follow the argument that you are making - are you saying they mods are overwhelmed? The whole point of having mod(erator)s is to moderate - subreddits are their own communities with the mods in charge. They are responsible for setting the ground rules and enforcing them, if you have a different understanding of how Reddit works, please let me know.


I'm saying that i personally don't think the mods there give a single damn about cleaning anything.


If you try to clean up after the trolls they'll just shitpost at you even more. Short of nuking the entire subreddit there's nothing to do.


so what is the point of having moderators?




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: