You're conflating legal laws with social and moral rules.
Nobody's claiming they broke legal laws; they're claiming they broke social and moral rules.
Rather than discuss that point, you retreat to arguing they didn't break legal laws.
You're conflating legal laws with social and moral rules.
Nobody's claiming they broke legal laws; they're claiming they broke social and moral rules.
Rather than discuss that point, you retreat to arguing they didn't break legal laws.
People in this thread are writing whole screeds arguing the importance of condemning this supposed moral breach, but it’s a case of the beg the question fallacy: people are seeking to prove there was a moral breach by assuming there was a moral breach.
I say again: nobody who was an early organic visitor to Reddit has ever complained of being deceived or harmed, and indeed they self-evidently benefited by finding content they liked and a site they wanted to post to.
Also: from the very start of this subthread my main point has been against grumpiness, and people keep grumpily replying, apparently trying to defend the importance of grumpiness. I mean, sure!