Hacker News Reader

Comment by LAC-Tech | Hacker News Reader

There's no agenda behind Reddit. The reality is much simpler. You get enough people together to discuss, you give them upvote/downvote tools, you weight things based on those upvotes/downvotes, and you'll find yourself witnessing the opinions of a meta-mind driven by whatever the majority opinions are of the audience of a particular discussion. The deeper into the discussion you go (e.g. sorting by upvotes), the more you'll learn about the dimensionality of the opinions of subpopulations of the audience.

Right but if they're constantly banning/silencing certain kinds of voices and nothers, it will become an echo chamber for the people against those voices.

Don't pretend at all like it's even handed here.

View on HN

I don't think any of it is even handed, nor was I pretending that it is. Every single member of Reddit has an agenda. Moderators have agendas. And then admins have agendas. And some subpopulation of each group will go through corrupt means to achieve their agenda. What I disagree with is that there is one totalizing agenda--one 'they' that controls it all. So far in the responses to the GP's post, people have been mentioning all sorts of ideas that they claim will cause an insta ban from Reddit. It is trivially simple to find large Reddit threads full of people who hold those opinions.

I personally believe there's a boundary between realistic thinking and conspiratorial thinking, and it centers around the level of certainty that there is a totalizing controlling force (be it a single person or a committee) who is exercising complete influence over something.

In short: if being against trans women competing in women's sports is an insta ban, why can I immediately find large Reddit threads with people with plenty of upvotes who do think they should be banned? If saying that Russia will be successful in invading Ukraine is an insta ban, why can I find large threads with upvoted people saying it will? One can find situations where people with those opinions are downvoted or banned, but nonetheless there are enough people who remain to make it unlikely that there is a systemic and effective controlling force.

You aren't allowed to have a community that believes these points though. Basically every "terf" or "tankie" forum is banned/quarantined. That's an administrative decision; not the product of organic debate.

> If saying that Russia will be successful in invading Ukraine is an insta ban, why can I find large threads with upvoted people saying it will? One can find situations where people with those opinions are downvoted or banned, but nonetheless there are enough people who remain to make it unlikely that there is a systemic and effective controlling force.

A few weeks ago, a group of trolls from rdrama.net created r/the_putin, a bait subreddit for posting pro-Putin and anti-Nazi memes. It was distasteful and designed to piss off reddit users, but there's no rule against it.

The subreddit got banned a couple of days later for "promoting hate", and the entire mod team was suspended for various reasons ranging from "threatening violence" to "subreddit ban evasion".

Supporting the Russian side of a war will absolutely get you purged, but it depends on your level of support. Another large subreddit that supported Russia was recently quarantined and will probably get banned soon. I don't think there is any subreddit with >100K subscribers that supports the Russian side and is in good standing with the website.

Who are they? /r/liberal or /r/conservative ?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com