LOUNGE all new asksnapzu ideasforsnapzu newtribes interesting pics videos funny technology science technews gaming health history worldnews business web research entertainment food living internet socialmedia mobile space sports photography nature animals movies culture travel television finance music celebrities gadgets environment usa crime politics law money justice psychology security cars wtf art google books lifetips bigbrother women apple kids recipes whoa military privacy education facebook medicine computing wildlife design war drugs middleeast diet toplists economy fail violence humor africa microsoft parenting dogs canada neuroscience architecture religion advertising infographics sex journalism disaster software aviation relationships energy booze life japan ukraine newmovies nsa cannabis name Name of the tribe humanrights nasa cute weather gifs discoveries cops futurism football earth dataviz pets guns entrepreneurship fitness android extremeweather fashion insects india northamerica
+139 142 3
Published 3 years ago with 81 Comments
Additional Contributions:

Join the Discussion

  • Auto Tier
  • All
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Post Comment
Conversation 39 comments by 21 users
  • sarcasimo
    +26

    I can't see this not causing a huge mess over there, but when you get down to it, we should applaud reddit reviewing their content policy. (Assuming they shut down offensive/obscene/"reprehensible" content")

    I say that because all of us here, signed up fully knowing about Snapzu's Rule 8: Don't post racism or hate speech.

    • racerxonclar
      +20

      It's not the content policy change I have issue with. I fully agree they need to clarify and straighten shit out. The issue is the constant fuzzy answers. When your user base can find you saying the direct opposite of what you just said in less than 20mins... something's seriously off and you don't have the nerve to admit it.

      Not actions that encourage trust of a site, if you get my point.

      • sarcasimo
        +11

        Oh yeah, you're totally right there. Everything the showrunners over there say is as clear as mud.

        If you're going to make a change that goes against what's been previously stated, then you need to come clean on that and admit it's a new course of action.

    • Misanthropist
      +15

      We should applaud reddit reviewing their content policy. (Assuming they shut down offensive/obscene/"reprehensible" content)"

      Problem is, everyone's definition of offensive/obscene/"reprehensible" content is different. Where do you draw the line?

      • NotWearingPants
        +14

        Exactly. If the content is legal, let the weirdos who like to do their weirdo things stay in their own little corner. Reddit's problem is that the professionally offended crowd don't want things they don't like to even exist.

        Are you going to censor /atheism because it offends /christians?

        /liberal because /conservative doesn't like it?

        Who draws the lines? Is only "popular" content going to be allowed? Good luck with that.

        This upcoming AMA may make the Jesse Jackson one look like a puff piece.

        • eikonoklastes
          +3

          It's sad that I still get this semi-obscure Reddit reference.

          The beauty of those rules is their renewed ambiguity. They can still do what the fuck they want. Basically nothing says "change," it's just reworded. They can just sit on the new rules until something comes along they don't like or too many users whine about. Then suddenly it falls under the new rules. Calling it now.

        • GreatMightyPoo
          +2

          The only way this is going to work is if they come up with a completely objective criteria for what is banned on Reddit; allowing no room for any admins personal beliefs effect a decision to ban something. If they're going to ban racism, they're going to have to define what constitutes racism as well in completely objective terminology. No terms like "reasonable person" and whatnot that can have a different meanings depending on the person; unless they define "reasonable person" objectively as it relates to reddit. Same with, like you mentioned, "offensive" since different things offend different people.

          I honestly can't see them pulling it off.

      • redalastor
        +13

        It's reddit, they'll draw it around SRS no matter what...

        • FurtWigglepants
          +2

          I'm pretty sure they've been on the down low since this whole thing started.

      • sarcasimo
        +6

        It's a slippery slope, which is the whole issue with any kind of content filtering/censoring system. There is no easy answer, because everyone has different thresholds as to what they find inappropriate.

        I think the best that they can do is establish their own guidelines, make them clear, and apply them equally across the entire site.

    • Burt (edited 3 years ago)
      +8
      • CrazyDiamond
        +11

        A beautiful mess. Reddit has become my soap opera. All they need to do is for the next episode is make Anita Sarkeesian a mod of /r/gaming.

      • racerxonclar (edited 3 years ago)
        +4

        This singular comment has actually just solidified my decision to get the hell away from Reddit. For a former CEO and co-founder, this post reads more like a random shitpost on reddit than anything spoken in an official capacity... nevermind that it's full of constant nonsense. It doesn't clarify anything except that the admins seeming are constantly screwing each other over at every opportunity.

        So you got Pao as a temp CEO, make some changes you knew would irritate your userbase, give zero clarification at any stage (with FPH or Victoria)... let a witchhunt form for Pao despite sitting on knowledge that would completely diffuse it... then AFTER you boot her out, you unveil that it was all basically a massive con (because remember, we actively withheld information to fuel a witchhunt, and now we're even stating that we've been a 'bastion of free speech' for 10 years against our will), and villainize your entire userbase...

        For a major corporation behind one of the most influential sites on the internet... this is fucking unacceptable. Conduct, transparency, practices... you name it. Just... wow. I never actually expected a site I hung out on for gaming content/communities would actually make me feel betrayed.

        • eikonoklastes
          +4

          Seriously, that's what I said the whole time. Those guys literally sit next to each other in one big office and then they post random half-baked comments and have to re-explain all the time. They should seriously just hire a few PR people and use the admin accounts just for... administrating. Or perhaps an experienced lawyer that can think up solid rules. And they seriously need canned responses for any user interaction, nobody needs that snotty attitude. Good grief.

    • Scarecrow237
      +2

      I have no way to trust if the person answering questions is the real and actual CEO or if it is just some publicist answering for him. They should have some kind of liaison that helps smooth over issues such as this.

    • shiranaihito (edited 3 years ago)
      0

      Snapzu's Rule 8: Don't post racism or hate speech.

      That's a silly and counter-productive rule, by the way. For example, most people don't see that truth isn't racist.

      So if I point out that black people are better dancers than us whiteys, people agree. But if I point out that black people are vastly overrepresented in American violent crime statistics, people want to crucify me.

      Let's talk about "hate speech" while at it. Why do black people protest a black guy getting shot by the police (through his own fault) by vandalizing and looting innocent businesses like a pack of savage apes?

      Did I just commit the crime of "hate speech"? -Why? They do, in fact, vandalize and loot innocent businesses, and that behaviour can be characterized as befitting a pack of savage apes. So what's the problem? Football hooligans tend to behave like packs of savage apes too, but is pointing that out "hate speech"? I'm guessing it's not, and the difference is race, of course.

      In reality, the rule about not posting racism or hate speech is just a call for Political Correctness, for self-censorship and for not speaking about things that matter because someone might be offended. That right there, is complete fucking horseshit.

      • drunkenninja (edited 3 years ago)
        +28

        What is wrong with expressing your opinion and arguing a point by actually being respectful? Believe it or not individuals can communicate their point without having to resort to racist name calling, threats against others or hate speech. Obviously, it's a little more effort, and people may disagree with you which is acceptable as usually the goal is to have a discussion in the first place. As for "censorship", we dont go around "censoring" unpopular opinions about anything, we don't care what you wish to discuss, we don't care that you have a difference of opinion or that you wish to argue a point about religion, race, politics, bubble gum flavour or the best time to drink coffee. We just care that you do it with respect to the rest of the community, and we don't think that's bullshit, we think its being a good host.

        • kigurame
          +13

          Well said ! There is nothing wrong with healthy discourse if it is done in civil and respectful manner. It's also what makes snapzu special and in my opinion is the most crucial thing we need to try and preserve at all cost especially with the recent influx of new users.

          • shiranaihito
            +3

            There is nothing wrong with healthy discourse if it is done in civil and respectful manner.

            Note that there's a difference between me ranting about black people behaving like savage animals, and not being civil towards whomever I'm talking to.

        Load more
      • AdelleChattre
        +17

        You started off well, there, with that line about “the truth isn’t racist.” Then you went to illustrate what you mean by ‘the truth,’ and it’s fairly repulsive.

        Opening with what you think will be an anodyne statement, you make a superiority/inferiority characterization based on race, and because that's not awkward enough yet, you manage to work in the phrase “us whiteys.” Point of future reference: no, that’s not endearing you to your audience the way you think it is.

        Next, you give us an example of something you say and that you feel persecuted for saying. The exemplar you provide for “the truth” that “isn’t racist” is apparently the inherent criminality of a race. Now, what you said can be factually true, and at the same exact time what you saying it tells people about you and your views can also be true. At this point, you haven’t lost the people reading your comment, necessarily, yet. The exact point has been made at Snapzu lately, without the unconsciously revealing baggage you bring out in a moment. This feeling of being persecuted by others for plainly stating your views may be something you misunderstand. It could be that your views are repellant.

        You‘re on a roll, now. Next up, you want to talk about quote hate speech unquote, because apparently the term bothers you on a basic level. Your heart rate is up, you're getting your kicks now, and you reach deep down and come up with this:

        Why do black people protest a black guy getting shot by the police (through his own fault) by vandalizing and looting innocent businesses like a pack of savage apes?

        Now, I remember there was some kind of a controversy a while back about the Planet of the Apes movies being recommended by Netflix in relation to other movies that dealt with the civil rights struggle of the Sixties and Seventies. This may have been a sham controversy, because the outrage in the press was to the effect of Netflix’s recommendation algorithm somehow confusing black folks for apes. When, in fact, Conquest of the Planet of the Apes and Battle for the Planet of the Apes are playing off of the politics of the time they were made and substantially are about slave revolt, organized labor, black power politics and the like. There was no need for a controversy over those recommendations.

        You, on the other hand, clearly see black folks as what you call savage apes. Sounds like a personal problem. Not interested in helping you with that, especially because you seem really proud of it. Let's not even unpack the other baggage in that sentence, how even your hypothetical police homicide victim deserved being shot, or that the collective noun for black protesters is apparently the word pack, or that the only form of political protest the blacks/apes in your mental world ever mount turns out to be vandalism and looting. I’m just going to let that hang in the air, because I don’t want to breathe any more of it.

        The truth you told us wasn’t racist is only getting more, and more, unconsciously bigoted the further you get into this rant.

        They do, in fact, vandalize and loot innocent businesses, and that behaviour can be characterized as befitting a pack of savage apes

        You're ascribing human behavior to race, and indignant that anyone could take you to be a racist. Here's another way you could think of that. There is a stink to that racism. People shun you when you reveal these attitudes because they stink, in a real way. Nobody m...

        Read Full
        • Appaloosa
          +2

          Cheap shot.

          • AdelleChattre
            +3

            I woke up this morning and as the haze cleared, knew this too.

        • shiranaihito (edited 3 years ago)
          -5

          I’d say you’re reading way too much into what I wrote, but.. that would be based on the assumption that you’re being sincere.

          But I don’t think you are. I think you’re a psychopath who decided to play games with me. Now there’s a claim I can’t prove, but someone who’s familiar with psychos knows that it’s not baseless either.

          you make a superiority/inferiority characterization based on race

          But they do actually tend to be better dancers. They have bigger penises too. You see, this is one reason why I think you’re a psychopath: We all know those are facts. You know it too, but here you are, shaming me for making truthful observations.

          you manage to work in the phrase “us whiteys.”

          I meant that in a self-deprecating way, but that doesn’t really matter because it’s you who decides what’s acceptable for me to say, right?

          Next, you give us an example of something you say and that you feel persecuted for saying. The exemplar you provide for “the truth” that “isn’t racist” is apparently the inherent criminality of a race.

          Now if you were intellectually honest, instead of continuing to shame me (like a psychopath would), you could just dig up some crime American crime statistics (as I explicitly specified, to make sure my claim was true), and see that I was, in fact, speaking the truth.

          I’ll save myself the trouble of digging them up for you, because it’s not like that would affect the way you conduct this conversation.

          You‘re on a roll, now. Next up, you want to talk about quote hate speech unquote, because apparently the term bothers you on a basic level.

          Hey, you actually got something right! The term does bother me “on a basic level”, because it’s mostly just a propaganda talking point for our rulers in their quest to gradually condition us into not speaking up about anything, until the whole world is one big North-Korea.

          Your heart rate is up, you're getting your kicks now

          That didn’t happen though. I’m calm even now!

          Now, I remember there was some kind of a controversy a while back about the Planet of the Apes movies being recommended by Netflix in relation to other movies..

          Huh? ”STORY TIME!” .. ? What the hell are you on about?

          that dealt with the civil rights struggle of the Sixties and Seventies.

          Oh, right. Racism! Black people vandalize and loot businesses that didn’t do anything to them because.. racism! But of course, and that’s also a good way to.. not give actual racists something substantial to point to?

          You, on the other hand, clearly see black folks as what you call savage apes.

          Now that’s a mighty broad brush. You shouldn’t generalize like that. Generalizations are bad. Think of how it makes people feel when you generalize about them!

          how even your hypothetical police homicide victim deserved being shot

          http://reason.com/blog/2015/03/09/doj-report-makes-a-strong-case-that-darr

          Wilson neverthless had reason to believe that Brown, who was six feet, four inches tall and weighed nearly 300 pounds, meant him harm. Physical evidence and witness reports confirm that Brown punched Wilson in the face as the officer sat in his police SUV. Brown's DNA on Wilson's gun and the wound on Brown's thumb are consistent with Wilson's account that he drew his weapon in self-defense, that Brown grabbed it and tried to take control of it, and that Wilson fired at him during the struggle.

          ---

          or that the collecti...

          Read Full
          • AdelleChattre
            +5

            But they do actually tend to be better dancers. They have bigger penises too.

            There are a few things you're holding as truths here. One is your admiration for dancing black men and their genitals, which you think is an objective fact. Another is that you need to confront us with that because we're not comfortable enough with it. Not surprised you spend a lot of time being sexually threatened that way. Not sure that it's other people's discomfort you ought to examine.

            We all know those are facts.

            No, we don't. Even if these racial generalizations were true in a loose sense, that would only be a starting place for thought. You can assert that this is so, but it's a coarse generalization, right and wrong about any specific individual. You can say that your opinion that this is so is a fact. What you're claiming, though, is not a fact. It might be the beginnings of some, but that would require you to go further.

            You could use this sham insight you have, you know, when you often find yourself thinking about dance, as the basis for some reflection on why you feel that way. You could go into the cultural context of dance and performance in black society. You could delve into the traditions that could explain a historical emphasis on developing an ability to dance as a priority in black culture, the way playing chess is taken seriously in Russian society. Rather than that, though, you short-circuit and come up with it being a racial characteristic rather than a cultural one you've given any real thought to.

            You've done yourself no favor with this prejudice. It's not going to be taken as you stating incontrovertible proof. At least in my case, I take it as revealing a mess of pre-occupations.

            I’d say you’re reading way too much into what I wrote, but.. that would be based on the assumption that you’re being sincere.

            Personally, I'd say you should look further into what you've written above, and I do say that sincerely.

            I meant that in a self-deprecating way

            What exactly is self-deprecating about you stating your race in co-opted black slang from the early Cenzoic era?

            but that doesn’t really matter because it’s you who decides what’s acceptable for me to say, right?

            Actually, it is up to me to decide what I'm going to accept. If it just so happens that majorities of people find your pronouncements on race offensive, you may want to consider whether everyone else is wrong and you're on solid ground. Maybe if you climbed down from that race-realist martyr's cross long enough, you might get a better perspective.

            Now if you were intellectually honest, instead of continuing to shame me (like a psychopath would), you could just dig up some crime American crime statistics (as I explicitly specified, to make sure my claim was true), and see that I was, in fact, speaking the truth.

            You can make a factual claim like that and still screw it up. The context where you're making a personal observation about race determining criminal behavior is part of the way it'll be received. Among the reasons that analytical statement could be taken as offensive include what you've done or not done with that information. The eugenicist's assumption that genetics determine behavior is likely to bother some people, given what horrors have been wrought in the name of that cause. Your refusal to consider historic, social and cultural reasons for the statistical claim, leaving the attribution of guilt to a race without lookin...

            Read Full
            • shiranaihito
              +1

              Well, your fun little past-time here is pretending to have a civil and intellectual conversation while actually just spewing your poison. You've taken it to a whole new level though, so I guess other psychos would be impressed.. at least if it were working on me, that is.

              You should move on now though, and find someone more innocent to play with.

            • AdelleChattre
              +2
              @shiranaihito -

              People say awful things sometimes. What matters more is how they treat people. Hopefully in real life you treat them as the unique individuals they are.

      • Fooferhill
        +13

        No one is forcing you to be part of this community. You join-you agree to the terms imposed by the site. If you decide you don't agree you are free to find an alternate site that might be more suited to your needs with rules or policies that you find appropriate. Many of us are here because we prefer these rules over sites that don't have them. Some of us choose to interact in communities where racism and hate are not condoned. Each to their own.

      • PocoBananas (edited 3 years ago)
        +11

        A. I disagree that blacks are better dancers than "us whiteys." It depends on the dance.

        B. Have you ever seen a pack (troop, actually) of apes loot a business? No, I haven't either. So why would it make sense to compare a group of people to apes while they do something which is unbefitting of that animal? Would it be because there is a history of comparing that race of people to that animal?

        Your argument works in a vacuum. If you ignore the centuries of context then comparing groups of black people to apes is no more offensive than comparing them to giraffes. But if you choose to have a conversation in public with other people on this planet who are familiar with the same histories as you and I, and still insist on comparing black people to apes, you're probably going to be called out on it.

        Considering what you're saying and who you're saying it to isn't horseshit, it's common sense.

        Edit: formatting!

        • shiranaihito
          +1

          I can't tell what you're trying to say. Centuries of "context"? Would that be.. Slavery?

          As for A and B, I'm not interested in bickering about semantics or choice of words here. Anyone gets the idea. People express themselves in various ways, depending on the circumstances.

      • Kalysta
        +4

        Why are you throwing out a stereotype and claiming it's the truth? Can you show me a scientific study performed that proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that black people are better dancers than white people? Your claim is exactly the same as the claims "All Asians are super intelligent", "All Americans are fat and lazy", and "All Mexicans are rapists." None of these are true. All of these are stereotypes. And if you quoted said stereotype to a person of it's associated race/class/gender/sexual orientation/etc you would very likely get eyes rolled at you and a diatribe as to why you're wrong.

        • shiranaihito
          +1

          Your claim is exactly the same as the claims "All Asians are super intelligent"

          You might want to note that I didn't say ALL. That would certainly be a false (and idiotic) claim to make.

    • Endymion
      +8

      Neither Alexis nor I created reddit to be a bastion of free speech, but rather as a place where open and honest discussion can happen

      Oh snap!

      • septimine
        +8

        So which is it? How do you have honest discussion without free speech?

        I don't mind honest and open rules, provided that they're internally consistent and consistently enforced. Reddit is random. You can be banned from one sub for just subscribing to another, shadow banned without warning or explanation, yet hate speech and harassment are common. Completely chaotic and arbitrary.

        • Goronmon (edited 3 years ago)
          +3

          You can be banned from one sub for just subscribing to another...

          Honestly, I don't really have a problem with this. Individual subreddits should be able to create pretty much whatever rules they want. Its the site-wide bans on people and content that becomes a problem.

          • septimine
            +1

            People in /r/offmychest were banning anyone subscribed to /r/fatpeoplehate-- didn't have to post in either sub, but being subbed to /r/fatpeoplehate was enough to get you banned from offmychest.

            I disagree that your subscription should get you banned from a sub. I could see behavior (posting in a sub) but subscribing just means you read it.

    • Goronmon
      +3

      Yeah...that was a dumb thing to say and pretty much outlines why so many people are getting frustrated with the company/admins as a whole.

      Personally, I feel like it's become pretty clear that Reddit as a company is pushing to make the site more palatable for advertising so that can drive more revenue on that front. The problem is, they know they can't just tell users that they they are changing their core values to support more advertising, so they have to constantly lie.

    • theykilledkenni
      +2

      I saw this and thought it was hilarious!

  • GreatMightyPoo
    +13

    So, who's up for some more popcorn?

    • Zeus
      +3

      What's the popcorn thing about? I keep seeing it, must have missed the original joke.

    • Endymion
      +3

      Alexis Ohanian

  • canuck
    +12

    I seriously hope Snapzu is ready for a new influx of users.

    • ClarkKent
      +8

      I think it is, it was down for about a hour the time before and it seems to be working fine. I just hope people who come here aren't coming for the wrong reasons. We don't demonstrate lots of hate here.

      It's actually very nice that most people here are genuine.

      • racerxonclar
        +9

        Sadly, it's law of the internet. Whatever platform, game, or site is the most popular, will attract the worst of the internet because they're just following the crowd, not there because they actively prefer it over the alternatives.

        My only hope is that other redditors give this place a chance and try to learn it a bit. The UI, feed settings, and tribe setup is different enough that it's actually taken me a bit of time to figure out. But, on the other side, I guess if a slightly unclear UI runs them off, they wouldn't have been great?

        • HagooBrain
          +4

          I'm a newly moved over redditor checking this place out (thanks to whoever invited me). I'll admit I'm quite frustrated with the layout here, although to be fair I've been on reddit for 5 years and sometimes it's hard to teach an old dog new tricks. Hopefully I'll figure out at the very least how to make the page background dark... this bright white is burning my night owl eyes...

      • redalastor
        +5

        We shouldn't advertise too much on reddit. We can't take huge wave of refugees. It's one of the rare case where the "trickle down" actually works. :)

      • MrY
        +2

        Just wait...

  • Anthaller
    +9

    Dear Snapzu: Please release an API so I can abandon reddit once and for all.

    • V1K1NG
      +5

      I would definitely be up for making an iOS app for Snapzu once the API is released. If you are an Android dev, then we got it covered! (sorry windows phone)

    • 8mm
      +5

      I heard its on the way.

    • MrY
      +3

      I'm sure they're working on it

      • Anthaller (edited 3 years ago)
        +1

        Yes, but like a spoiled little kid "I want it now!" :p

        • MrY
          +3

          haha, are you a developer?

          • Anthaller
            +2

            No, but I know once it's out there will be apps. And just like when the waitress asks "Will you be having and apps." my response will be to take whatever is available.

  • racerxonclar
    +6

    The part that really saddens me is it's the lack of straightforwardness that's pushing me away from reddit. I don't directly have a problem with the changes they'll likely implement (not a part of the controversial subreddits, etc)... yet something just feels off using and supporting a site that will not give me a reliable answer to anything and the admins are bickering around threads like a bunch of children.

    Oh well... feels like the internet as a whole is taking a hit.

    • Lawdog
      +2

      Same for me. I'm less worried about what they've done than how and why they've done it.

  • Burt (edited 3 years ago)
    +6

    Has any one even checked Reddit's Alexa Ranking?

    Since this nonsense started happening, their rankings are dropping. The entire month of June the front page was riddled with Ellen Pao hate posts. I'm surprised the admins even let them stay as long as they did because the average user has no idea about the politics of reddit, nor do they care, according to Alexa rankings.

    This whole mess of drama is just scaring off new users that might be interested.

    Reddit's future is not looking good. I'm looking forward to the alternatives and hope the folks running them are prepared for massive expansion. If anything, Snapzu should open its arms to these users and be ready. People are looking to jump ship. People desperately want an alternative right now (I'm one of them!)

    • picklefingers
      +2

      I remember somebody bringing this up and I think it turned out to be something to do with Alexa and not reddit because ratings on other traffic sites were up.

  • Lawdog
    +4

    This is why we need to build and move to a decentralized platform. It seems that Reddit's stances are continuously in flux depending on whatever seems to be convenient for the company at a certain point in time. If people don't want to see certain offensive content that's understandable, but the goal shouldn't be to remove content just because some group finds it offensive. At most a system should be put in place to allow the content to be flagged/filtered out for users who don't want to see it. What's clear is that Reddit doesn't care about sticking to a set of principles. It will change its principles whenever they think that it is profitable to do so. They cared about free speech when it was necessary to keep and grow a small userbase who cared about free speech. Now they want to attract the masses and their grandmas and would rather throw their old users and principles under the bus. Centralized systems just can't be trusted. They'll come up with a set of rules today and change them again tomorrow. Yesterday they were for free speech. Today they are for "open and honest discussion." Tomorrow they will be for happy conversations. The next day they will be for connecting consumers with products and services.

    Not me, but it sums up my feelings on the subject pretty well

  • picklefingers
    +3

    As much as we know this will cause a shit ton of drama, this is probably the post move they could've made. They are going to have to address it, and no matter what choice they make, a shit storm will be raised by some group. I hope that they finally finish what they started. That was my whole opinion on the FPH drama. Either you go all the way banning offensive and harassing content, or you don't go at all. Just sort of dipping your toe in the water doesn't do much either way and pisses both groups off.

  • Jupiter7
    +3

    One of the things about Reddit is that it had all of these subreddits for everything you can think of. Even terrible ones. Don't like one? Don't go there! Really simple concept. I think Reddit could have squeezed out a few more years if it stuck to its principles. Instead, we get to discover how good popcorn tastes while watching Reddit crash and burn.

    Also really awesome to see Huffman talk about how they never meant to be a bastion of free speech, but is called out with an article with Ohanian using those exact words. I watched a video of the two being interviewed after starting Reddit w/ Y Combinator, back in 2005 (saw it once but haven't been able to find it again, so no link). I think both of those kids in the 2005 interview would be absolutely ashamed with these two sellouts running their company now. What a shame.

  • PistachioJones
    +2

    This is a really strange to roll out such a major announcement if they wanted actual community participation.

    Why not list out the proposed changes in this announcement and then discuss them during the AMA after people have had some time to think?

    Instead there's going to be two entire days of speculation followed by an AMA regarding content people are just seeing for the first time. Unless Huffman spends the entire day in the AMA I can't see it being a very productive discussion. Perhaps that's the point...

    • NinjaKlaus
      +2

      People issuing complaints and suggestions now gives them the ability to read them and form arguments for them or reasons why they need to throw them out. It is a fact finding mission. They really don't want to be caught too off guard for the AMA.

      • PistachioJones
        +1

        Good point. I'm curious to see if they have anything to say about Alexis' comment from 2012. I'm sure it'll be one of the top-rated questions.

        It's disappointing to see reddit's "leadership" act like such poor leaders.

        • NinjaKlaus (edited 3 years ago)
          +3

          I've seen some stuff about them trying to pull down videos from 2005 where the current/new CEO says the same thing about it being a bastion of free speech. I think they'll do everything in their power to deny deny deny those things were said.

  • brightgreen
    +1

    Ugh, the reaction to this on Reddit is just confirming that deciding to move over to Snapzu was a good idea. Sure, the Reddit admins aren't exactly going about this particularly well but at the end of the day we all know the drama and outrage from users isn't about that but the attack on their ability to post whatever abhorrent content they want on the site they want to without any obstacle or consequences whatsoever (which btw is not "free speech")

  • Arbituz
    +1

    Sit back, relax, and watch the shit storm roll through.

Here are some other snaps you may like...