4 ms·
Please refrain from commenting on subjects that you're ignorant about. "Distasteful" subreddits that consist of compromising photos of teenagers taken without
by betterth 14y ago
Please refrain from commenting on subjects that you're ignorant about.
"Distasteful" subreddits that consist of compromising photos of teenagers taken without their knowledge are to be tolerated."
As per http://as.reddit.com/rules/ http://as.reddit.com/rules/
"No child pornography or sexually suggestive content featuring minors."
These kinds of things are not tolerated on Reddit.
- tptacek 14y agoI think if you read my comment carefully you'll discover that I didn't say "child pornography" or "sexually suggestive content featuring minors". Are you suggesting that "child pornography" and "sexually suggestive content featuring minors" is the bright line, and that anything on the privacy spectrum that doesn't cross that line should be defended? That's the implication I get from your comment, but I'm happy to be corrected.
- bduerst 14y agoVoltaire nailed it best with "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."
- tptacek 14y agoThat's not a real argument. Are you seriously suggesting that there is no line to be drawn about what people can and can't post to Reddit? My guess is you don't support the posting of child pornography and snuff films.
- bduerst 14y agoIt is a real argument. Are you suggesting that you can't find "intellectual clarity" from the list of reddit rules?
- tptacek 14y agoI told you why I don't think it's a real argument, and you responded by repeating yourself without acknowledging my point.
- bduerst 14y agoYou built a straw man and said, "Are you suggesting this straw man?" You've done this with several comments now. It's entirely up to a private website to run itself in any manner it deems fit, and if you can't find "intellectual clarity" when the rules are posted then why do you even comment?
- tptacek 14y agoNo, I surmise that you think I'm attacking a straw man because you saw the words "child pornography" and assumed (incorrectly but reasonably, given the hyperbole in this particular controversy) that I was equating creepshots and jailbait with child pornography. I was in fact not doing that. I was suggesting that the principle on which your argument rested --- that we should tolerate all content in order to defend free expression --- was probably counterfeit. I was saying that you did have a problem with child pornography, not that you accept it and were thus a suspect participant in this conversation.
- danielweber 14y agoIf you say "reddit can run itself any way it wants," that's true, but it doesn't lend itself to useful conversation. 'tptacek is also free to comment on what he sees as inconsistent moderation rules on HN (as long as HN tolerates it, etc etc turtles all the way).
- bduerst 14y agoFinally - some discussion. The moderation on reddit, outside of the rules, is run by volunteers. The rules set by admin are clear so why does tptacek have an issue with clarity?
- milesskorpen 14y agoAlright, then, let's rephrase that a bit: "Distasteful" subreddits that consist of compromising photos of PEOPLE taken without their knowledge are to be tolerated." I'm not sure why a rule against minors suddenly makes this okay.
- mnicole 14y agoA link to the rules isn't going to stop things from slipping through the cracks.