Thread

1. nomilk · 1790655652 · focus · HN ↗

   The biggest problem I have with reddit is mods can slowly but systematically ban users who express unfavourable opinions, and over time, anyone casually browsing could mistakenly believe those views are unpopular, whereas in reality everyone with that view (everyone who spoke it, anyway) was banned.

   To give a simple example, one video game franchise subreddit bans any negative discussion on the most recent title. Over 5-10 years, this shielded them from negative feedback. But the franchise has tanked because core users weren't listened to, and they ended up making something nobody wanted.

   1. Drupon · 1790661324 · focus · HN ↗

      To give another simple example, Israel has managed to pollute the mods of r/worldnews enough to make it a singularly active cheerleader of the genocide until the last year or two.

      1. TheHalc · 1790666839 · focus · HN ↗

         I was banned from there this summer after posting something relatively innocuous asking whether Palestine had a right to defend itself. At least, I assume that's why I was banned, they never actually gave a reason.
      2. LtWorf · 1790667705 · focus · HN ↗

         There is a single moderator for most of the big italian subreddits and he bans anyone that says "genocide bad". He also bans anyone who points this out.

         Pretty sure that's his day job.

      3. lysp · 1790675458 · focus · HN ↗

         This is what comes to mind for me too.

         As an example, I am well aware of how strict r/worldnews is moderated on IvP topics, so I am extra careful to be factual rather than simply making comments based on more general thoughts, like I do for other areas.

         I have responded to some comments in the past by responding by quoting legal cases, news links I sourced my comment from, or from subject experts.

         It doesn't matter how accurate or factually proven the comment is. If it's even slightly critical, it'll end up with votes of anywhere from -10 to -50 from all the down votes.

         For other people's comments, anything negative that hasn't been down voted into oblivion will always have the "cross" icon next to them, meaning it's listed as "controversial", which is when it has a large number of down votes, plus up votes to balance it out.

      4. mschuster91 · 1790689362 · focus · HN ↗

         Where's the problem? r/worldnews is pretty Zionist in nature, and anime_titties, workreform plus way too many other "leftist" subreddits are anywhere from somewhat neutral over "Israel bad" to outright glorifying Hamas.

         Don't want to engage with Zionists, go to anime_titties, don't want to engage with Qatari propaganda, go to worldnews.

         1. Drupon · 1790700280 · focus · HN ↗

            My problem is that that website didn't let a small genocidal colony infiltrate and subvert its major frontpage subs 10 years ago.

            1. mschuster91 · 1790702996 · focus · HN ↗

               I'd rather ask myself how Qatar managed to wiggle its way into pretty much every university and many left-wing and "progressive" parties that now openly support Hamas.

               Israel has been allied with our nations ever since it was founded, the Qataris and other oil sheiks were a bunch of warlords and nomads a century ago.

               1. Drupon · 1790963824 · focus · HN ↗

                  It is progressive to support Hamas because they're the only major organization liquidating settler colonial vermin infesting their land.
      5. power78 · 1790708428 · focus · HN ↗

         The opposite is also true. There are many subs that posting anything positive about Israel will get you banned on that sub and all subs that moderator moderates which is insane.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.