Reddit tries something different - a rule!

Post by **John Q. Public** » Fri May 15, 2015 10:22 pm

Reddit is finally growing up. Or at least it’s trying.

For a decade, the site has been known for its anonymous user-driven community, volunteer-moderated forums, and its rigid defense of the most notoriously offensive subreddits and trolls on free speech grounds. But that hands-off attitude is slowly changing.

The company is the latest social media site to introduce updates to its policies explicitly banning the harassment of individual users. According to the new rules, the site now prohibits systematic attacks that make an individual feel Reddit is an unsafe place to express ideas, or that make someone fear for their safety (or the safety of those around them).

“We’ve seen many conversations devolve into attacks against individuals,” the Reddit team explained in a blog post announcing the policy yesterday. “Some users are harassing people across platforms and posting links on Reddit to private information on other sites.” The site seems to hope that the ban will help curtail future targeted abuse.

~snip~

In a recent survey of 15,000 Redditors, the company found that users feel uncomfortable contributing to the site because of negative responses to comments. In fact, the top reason users don’t use or recommend the site is to avoid “hate and offensive content.”

http://www.wired.com/2015/05/reddit-wan ... wing-hard/

Gee. Conversations devolving into attacks on individuals? People feeling it's an unsafe place to express ideas and feeling uncomfortable contributing to the site because of negative responses? Hmmmm. Maybe we should try something like that.

Parrotpaul · Post by **Parrotpaul** » Sat May 16, 2015 6:07 am

"It 'ill never fly, Orville."

Troglodyte · Post by **Troglodyte** » Sat May 16, 2015 8:58 am

Maybe not for you, Paul..

There are plenty of people out there who would like to express their ideas without the few on here who seem to live just to pounce on anyone who expresses an idea contrary to their way of thinking, with put downs, bombast, and flat denials. Too many times discussions are dropped, or locked, because the topic strays into areas those few don't want to discuss, so the BS begins.
I don't expect Robert's rules to govern the threads, but a little thoughtful responses and politeness just might increase the readership and responses beyond the few who regularly post.. Might even promote more members beyond the 5 or 6 who grin and bear it..
If you are not part of the solution, you just might be part of the problem....

Parrotpaul · Post by **Parrotpaul** » Sat May 16, 2015 9:09 am

Relax, Trog...you do know what that bright green smiley face means...no? I thought you were the Lord of the Smilies.

Troglodyte · Post by **Troglodyte** » Sat May 16, 2015 6:52 pm

Are you outing yourself, Paul???

Post by **John Q. Public** » Sat May 16, 2015 7:49 pm

Trog wrote:There are plenty of people out there who would like to express their ideas without the few on here who seem to live just to pounce on anyone who expresses an idea contrary to their way of thinking, with put downs, bombast, and flat denials.

Isn't that pretty much everybody? It at least seems to be the majority. The place isn't very welcoming. How long did Omar have to post before people stopped calling him Parrotpaul's sock puppet? How many threads have devolved into bashing Wabash or Brooke? How many warnings have we given and how many threads have been closed because people attacked the person rather than what he said?

I don't expect Robert's rules to govern the threads, but a little thoughtful responses and politeness just might increase the readership and responses beyond the few who regularly post.. Might even promote more members beyond the 5 or 6 who grin and bear it.

Wouldn't that be nice? It's been pretty rare around here that anybody's discussed an actual subject, rather than arguing about who supports or opposes it. Take the TPP for example. We've had two threads on it - the first about Obama dilly-dallying on it, then a couple weeks later one about him and Warren disagreeing on it. But not once has the actual agreement been discussed, other than me saying it didn't sound like a good deal and Booke somehow connecting it with illegal immigrants or some such. A few of us have tried discussing issues but we haven't had much success. I'd sure love it if we could discuss anything here without using the words "Obama," "Bush," Liberals" or "Conservatives." Or "immigrants." I can't think of a less interesting way of discussing much of anything than the usual "My dogma's better than your dogma" that usually goes on here.

Orange County Forums