It has been over a year since May May June, but it's the gift that keeps on giving. A user in /r/undelete accuses another of "sucking mod cock." (np.reddit.com)
SubredditDrama
11 ups - 0 downs = 11 votes
50 comments submitted at 17:47:21 on Aug 21, 2014 by IAmAN00bie
It goes double for this whole cesspool of a subreddit which by rights the admins should close down for brigading. I mean, if we have rules, the least you mod worshippers can do is follow them.
Never mind that the whole reason I'm yelling at fritzy is that he is bringing up /u/jij as an example of a good moderator in a thread about mod abuse surrounding the Zoë Quinn story. Here is a guy coming into a thread about mod abuse praising /u/jij. He does it to troll. He succeeded. Now I'm here in SRD, as often I am when I interact with him, and he's painted me as the bad guy.
And you butter addicts lap that shit up. Y'all are pathetic.
You give us way too much credit.
Wow you're really mad aren't you. You should relax, it's just reddit after all.
If it's just reddit and you don't care soooooo hard, why are you even in this thread?
I'm not mad as much as fed up by people who think they are so bright running in droves to have popular opinion shielded from them on the only popular website where popular opinion is allowed to rise to the top at all. And they are sooooo much smarter than me. They know best. Fuck that.
I used to come to reddit and jump into a thread, sometimes the headline was false, and the comments were a place to hash out the truth among people whose only power relative to each other was how much other users liked it.
Anymore, the belief around here is that if you let your users create content and you don't curate it, you are a failure as a mod. That's unadorned horseshit. It's self-serving mod dribble and you shouldn't accept it.
If you want curated content, there are almost infinite sources for it: news radio, television news, magazines, blogs, newspapers, etc. Reddit's strength is unmediated content. Of course some moderation is absolutely necessary and some subreddits absolutely need strict rules, but how does a . . .
You know what you're not going to read this anyway. I'll just get mocked. So you're probably right, I'm just completely butthurt or something. Don't worry about it, sport.
I'm here because i'm bored and you're funny.
Also if you're so bothered create your own subreddit where you can set whatever rules you want, instead of just bitching about how other people run their subreddits.
If you want your gaming news curated for you, why don't you go to Kotaku? If you want your politics news curated for you, why don't you go to Fox News? If you want your religious news curated for you, why don't you go to a church?
How about instead of trying to make reddit more like those things, we turn reddit back into an independent news source? One where I'm going to see some things I might be uncomfortable with, but at least I haven't diluted myself into thinking I'm a special little snowflake that can't handle the reality that some people have really bad opinions and taste. I'd rather be reminded 100 times over that people have bad judgment than have 1 crappy moderator on this website. And there are dozens of really crappy moderators doing really crappy things.
Whenever someone calls them out on it, it lands on subs like this one. Where the users are encouraged to mock those opinions and you are gently pointed to the threat that you really shouldn't participate in because that would be wrong. wink, wink.
Your opinion is being manipulated by people who don't have your best interest at heart and its not as obvious as a moustache twirling villain cackling like a maniac. It's teenagers trying to sound smarter than they actually are riling up other teenagers using the age old appeal "man, everybody besides me is dumb as shit."
Fuck that.
I mean maybe it's not worth me working myself up about it but I can guarantee you there are plenty of mode putting far more effort into influencing public opinion in shady ass ways and this subreddit is one of their favorite tools. It's very subtle but very effective and it does annoy the fuck out of me, frankly.
But reddit isn't an independent news source, it's a secondary source because it's mostly repeating stuff from other sources. Also it's open to the bias of it's user base so it will be bias like Fox News and what not.
Also are you trying to say the SRD is some evil subreddit designed to keep people in line by mocking them?
Also isn't the whole "everyone besides me is dumb as shit" pretty much what you're doing now.
"maybe it's not worth me working myself up about it" to late for that mate.
Edit: also you still haven't given a reason why you don't make your own subreddit.
Of course reddit has a bias, but its bias isn't backed by some huge pile of money. It's backed by popular opinion. That is until you prune the popular opinion away, leave curated opinion, and then masquerade like its popular opinion. It's gone from a democratic news commentary engine to a man on the street bit where some producer picks out the people he wants to showcase to make whatever point he wants to make. We have the illusion of what we used to have and that is kinda dangerous.
I wouldn't say that SRD was designed to be "evil" or that the people who come here are evil, but SRD like all subreddits have a bias and moderators and their supporters are often very successful in brigading against opinions they don't like. I've seen my opinion on a mod go from positive to double digit negative after a /r/SRD post because the poster can tailor the headline and the portion of the debate they know will make the other guy look bad. It's like in hockey where guys are often successful in punching a guy and when the other guy retaliates the official sees him because the first guy was successful at getting the official to look at a guy right after he's managed to rile him up. It's cancerous. It probably violates site rules. It's no good.
I think what I am saying is I'm not deluded enough to believe that I'm not dumb as shit. Everyone has biases. You quiet wrong opinion by arguing against it, not by silencing it. Silencing it is what they tried to do with Zoë's story. The truth depends on transparency. Scumminess depends on lack of accountability.
Again, man. If I want to start a sub /r/CoolSub and people post uncool content, I should get to censor that. I created that brand. People who come to CoolSub are signing up for my subreddit.
If I am interested in Nintendo, I'm going to go to the /r/Nintendo sub. If that is filled with shitty mods, and guess what, it is, they don't own that subreddit in the same way. They didn't create the brand Nintendo. They don't pay to host the site. They are not creators of anything. In that case, their role should be more akin to a janitor than an editor. If you don't like popular opinion on Nintendo, well, go to a Nintendo blog you agree with. Or create /zxcv1992sSuperAwesomeNintendoSub and go ahead and enforce the rules however you want. But when you are dealing with already existing brands and topics, your subscribers aren't really your subscribers are they? They are redditors who happen to like to discuss news or politics or Nintendo or whatever. They didn't sign up for your bureaucratic rules. I wouldn't be bothered if there weren't so few sources like reddit. There is 4chan, but the circlejerk overwhelms the content there. Which is a threat here, I will admit. There is twitter, but it's more transient than reddit.
Let's say Nintendo releases a really shitty SSBros. Let's say I review it and review it well and people upvote it and comment and agree on the /r/Nintendo sub. Do you think it's okay for the mods to nuke that review because it violates their rule that negative reviews aren't allowed? (this is hypothetical) If you think of the subreddit as a hashtag, it would be as if twitter put teenagers in charge of censoring content for each hashtag. We'd all have lost an important source of communication and there would be millions of people cheering the victorious censors as they did it.
Book burnings are popular. I bet I could arrange a fairly big one. What many mods do is similar to book burning. I'm not surprised that some people like it better that way but it does infuriate me a bit.
>What many mods do is similar to book burning
No. Book burnings are to destroy ideas. What mods do is say "this is a library for non fiction biographies, we can't accept this donation of Game of Thrones, take it home or try the fantasy book library over on 17th st".
Or they dont like Edward Snowden articles for whatever reason and they delete them from the /r/technology sub. Yeah, if you're running /r/NonFictionBiographies you should get some leeway. If your running /r/books and you only allow Non-fiction biographies, maybe that's not ideal.
You seem to think popular opinion somehow is more correct, there is a reason we have experts. Because popular opinion can be way way wrong.
Also the Zoe story was stopped mainly because reddit has a really bad habit of witch hunting people over unsubstantiated claims. So it's best to try and keep a lid on it until people cool down.
Also by saying if they don't have full right to the /r/nintendo sub because they didn't create /r/nintendo that means nintendo themselves do. And with them in control it would be even more bias. Also I think it's ok because it's the head mods subreddit, you value popular opinion well if popular opinion deems a subreddit to be shitty it will move to another one, you don't need the nintendo name to have a good community and subreddit.
Also you're being ridiculous, book burnings are different because with book burnings the idea is you remove the whole trace of the book from everywhere. With removing the comment they can easily comment somewhere else.
And if it's so bad go to a different site or just spend some time away from reddit. It would likely be good for you to close reddit and give it a month or two.
One. If I wanted somebody choosing experts for me I would be watching the news or reading a blog. I'm aware experts are useful but the wisdom of crowds is also useful. Neither is infallible. Both tend to be net positives. Reddit is one of few sources for the crowd based opinion.
I understand trying to protect people but when it comes to interpersonal relationships any shield can be turned into a sword and Zoë and people like her are great at that. Several bad moderators here behave similarly.
Nintendo doesn't have to be in charge of /r/Nintendo. What if nobody is in charge? That was how reddit was founded. I understand it is not entirely practical now but that doesn't mean we should turn all control over to unaccountable mods just because that's the way we've been doing it.
If politics has 10 million subs and /r/PoliticsWithoutShittyMods has 10 thousand its the functional equivalent to a book burning.
And if you don't like people talking about what they like and don't like about this website maybe its you who should GTFO.
You take reddit very seriously, don't you?
The wisdom of the crowd is useful but also very wrong a lot of the time. Also if the crowd itself is select you are likely to run into bias on the opinion.
Do you really think Zoe is going to be able to turn this around. She is going to get witch hunted hard, at least reddit could not be a staging area for it.
Having nobody in charge would be ridiculous, the site would be none stop memes and other shit. Also the mods are accountable, if they fuck up people can easily form a rival subreddit.
No, no it's none because the information could still be posted. With book burning the information is totally removed from everywhere.
Also it doesn't bother me what people post, post to your hearts content.
you seem rather upset m8
Um... should this be linked as SRD IN SRD? lol
I was wondering the same thing.
> he's painted me as the bad guy.
no... no... you are doing that all by yourself buddy.. I always love it when you explode randomly. Your comments are pure buttery goodness