Slashdot Mirror


Reddit Cofounder Says Site Was Built By a Horde of Fake Accounts

derekmead writes "How, exactly, did Reddit get so big? Well, according to Reddit cofounder Steve Huffman, in the early days the Reddit crew just faked it 'til they made it.' In a video for Udacity, Huffman describes how the first Redditors populated the site's content with tons of fake accounts. These days, with the site's users are wary of people using expendable accounts to try to seed their own content. But early on, Huffman said that using fake accounts driven by the founders was key to building the tone they wanted to the site. Early on the Reddit crew could shape the discourse of the site in the direction they wanted, and as the real user base grew, those standards held allowing the fake accounts to fade away."

192 comments

  1. Le first post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    You don't say

    1. Re:Le first post by heptapod · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      FFFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUU-

    2. Re:Le first post by Culture20 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Wait, so are all these lame first posts made by Taco and Cowboy Neal?

    3. Re:Le first post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod parent sideways.

    4. Re:Le first post by Gideon+Wells · · Score: 1

      I imagine it is their subtle and slight way of getting back at all the readers for headaches we caused.

      --
      by Anonymous Coward: I, for one, welcome the shift from car analogies to pizza analogies. um.. overlords?
    5. Re:Le first post by Waldeinburg · · Score: 1

      I never thought I would see a FP modded 5 o_O

  2. Simulation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, that's pretty much how market research works, too.

    1. Re:Simulation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      Considering they're owned by Conde Nast, a company that benefits almost solely from market research in the form of magazine advertisements you are correct sir.

      The funniest part is all the Redditors giving away all that market research for free like a bunch of tools.

    2. Re:Simulation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yea, I mean its not like the owners of Slashdot NASDAQ: GKNT have any desire to monetize their user base at *all*...

    3. Re:Simulation by icebraining · · Score: 1

      They're not owned by Nast anymore, they're now a direct subsidiary of its parent company.

    4. Re:Simulation by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

      Tools? Who else would have deliberately shaped the "know nothing, shit-for-brains" hive-mind that is Reddit?

      It's like 4chan for jocks.

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    5. Re:Simulation by elp · · Score: 1

      I'm sure 4chan was grown the same way.

    6. Re:Simulation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. No it has not. moot doesn't even

    7. Re:Simulation by bigtomrodney · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'd say it's more the case of explaining why redditors remember the earliest years containing coherent and knowledgable discussion. You had a focussed audience with a vested interest in getting quality discussion going. When the great unwashed outnumber these quality submissions you get a link aggregator that thinks it's a forum, where every second post is in the form of a badly phrased meme.

      --
      I never get used to these constant resurrections
    8. Re:Simulation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are other approaches.
      For example, StackOverflow hires a thousand Indian programmers and eight American proofreaders to pose as "Jon Skeet" attracting all the C# code monkey star-wannabes.

    9. Re:Simulation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wat a minute. Are you talking about Reddit, or Slashdot?

  3. Who says they stopped? by cephalien · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Been to r/circlejerk, lately? :)

    Either way, who cares. If it hadn't taken off, they'd just end up as a bunch of weirdos talking to their multiple personalities. But it did, and the same tactic is used all the time - ever see a single dollar bill in a tip jar? Priming isn't new.

    --
    If firefighters fight fire, and crimefighters fight crime, what do freedom fighters fight? - George Carlin
    1. Re:Who says they stopped? by girlintraining · · Score: 5, Funny

      ever see a single dollar bill in a tip jar? Priming isn't new.

      Well, I have.. I took all the other bills out when the cashier had his back turned. :D Everything I learned, I learned from Batman movies.

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    2. Re:Who says they stopped? by DerekLyons · · Score: 4, Interesting

      ever see a single dollar bill in a tip jar? Priming isn't new.

      Yep. At least according to local legend, when the built the first Costco they had the employees park close in and move their cars several times a day - to create the illusion of a busy parking lot.

    3. Re:Who says they stopped? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Not too much different than a restaurant with windows on a busy sidewalk seating people in tables near the windows if business is slow, to make the restaurant at first glance look active...

    4. Re:Who says they stopped? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ever see a single dollar bill in a tip jar

      Ever seen a single dollar bill in a bums cup?

      Okay that doesn't make sense but you got me thinking.

    5. Re:Who says they stopped? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not too much different... if the people sitting by the windows are made of cardboard. Reddit was created with totally fake accounts. And by the looks of it, still populated with fakes.

    6. Re:Who says they stopped? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ever see a single dollar bill in a tip jar?

      LOL! I thought my co-workers and I came up with that on our own. I suppose that's stupid, but I'm guessing millions by now have independently thought up the exact same idea. Funny, how ideas that work keep cropping up in our society over and over without anyone ever evangelically spreading them

    7. Re:Who says they stopped? by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 5, Funny

      > Been to r/circlejerk, lately? :)

      You mean there is a difference from reddit? ;-) /me ducks

    8. Re:Who says they stopped? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      r/depression was really helpful to me. At least, I'm still alive because of them.

    9. Re:Who says they stopped? by Gideon+Wells · · Score: 1

      That reminds me, my grandmother used to have a saying "It is bad luck to buy a coin bank without anything in it". In hindsight, I think she just liked tricking people into thinking they suckered her out of potential money. Usually it was just a few pennies or old washers she picked up.

      --
      by Anonymous Coward: I, for one, welcome the shift from car analogies to pizza analogies. um.. overlords?
    10. Re:Who says they stopped? by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      to create the illusion of a busy parking lot.

      To anyone watching the parking lot for an extended amount of time to before deciding whether or not to shop there?

      I'm not sure that necessarily proves the principle is sound, it just proves that some people believe in the principle.

    11. Re:Who says they stopped? by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      Been to r/circlejerk, lately? :)

      Man, k5 already made me hate the word "meta" with a passion. Or rather more. You just flat out call it what it is like that, I'm not dumb enough to look.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    12. Re:Who says they stopped? by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      to create the illusion of a busy parking lot.

      To anyone watching the parking lot for an extended amount of time to before deciding whether or not to shop there? I'm not sure that necessarily proves the principle is sound, it just proves that some people believe in the principle.

      The first Costco was alongside a medium busy road, so lots of chances for people to see the lot day after day. But it was also in a somewhat dodgy somewhat rundown semi industrial area, so convincing those people that they were open and a going concern was probably not without value.

    13. Re:Who says they stopped? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I never thought of that... (the single dollar in a tip jar)

    14. Re:Who says they stopped? by auldnic · · Score: 1

      I am happy to hear this.

    15. Re:Who says they stopped? by splatter · · Score: 1

      That is actually not uncommon from the previous generation. My wife was told the same by her grandmother, and to this day always makes sure there is a penny or some change in a gift wallet, handbag, purse, or piggy bank.

      --
      "(I) have this unfortunate condition that causes me not to believe a single thing any politician says when a mic's on.
    16. Re:Who says they stopped? by dj245 · · Score: 1

      I've seen this a lot with year-round firework stores. Firework stores (aside from the 3 weeks before the 4th of July, and the 2 weeks before Christmas) are generally not busy places. The employees part right in front to make it seem that other people are there. Many people don't like to go into a store with nobody else inside.

      --
      Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
  4. Ask yourself... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Am I real?

    1. Re:Ask yourself... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The answer is clearly no.

    2. Re:Ask yourself... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or maybe that's just what they want you to think and I really am real.

    3. Re:Ask yourself... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How can you say that when you don't exist?

    4. Re:Ask yourself... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      is the cake a lie?

    5. Re:Ask yourself... by jd · · Score: 5, Funny

      No, I'm complex. Or maybe quaternion.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    6. Re:Ask yourself... by jvkjvk · · Score: 2

      Well, all I know is I'm not fixed precision. :)

    7. Re:Ask yourself... by i_ate_god · · Score: 2

      I just float around, uncaring of the world below me...

      --
      I'm god, but it's a bit of a drag really...
    8. Re:Ask yourself... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well seeing that rules are for real things, and there are no rules for things that can't possibly exist, there's nothing preventing non-existing me from posting. :P

    9. Re:Ask yourself... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      I'm irrational, so yes.

    10. Re:Ask yourself... by oodaloop · · Score: 1

      How the hell should I know if you're real?

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    11. Re:Ask yourself... by WillDraven · · Score: 1

      I keep insisting I have lots of complex friends, but my wife says they're imaginary.

      --
      This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
    12. Re:Ask yourself... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yes, the cake is a lie

      that does not stop it from being incredibly tasty

      welcome to diabetics anonymous!

  5. I knew it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Everyone on Facebook and LinkedIn is fake too.

    1. Re:I knew it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      especially any women that took interest in you.

  6. Ahhh.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...so my suspicions about using Reddit for anything WERE founded. Glad to know I could see that then.

    1. Re:Ahhh.... by Man+On+Pink+Corner · · Score: 4, Informative

      Given that they are now a top-100 site, or close to it, it would be pretty stupid to infer anything about Reddit's current user base from the tactics they used in their first few weeks.

    2. Re:Ahhh.... by makomk · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah. These days the site is basically run by users who managed to get in early enough and become well-know enough that they got moderator positions on the default subreddits - and they run a horde of fake accounts so the users don't have to. Seriously, one of the most prolific moderators (Karmanaut) was actually caught posting replies to his own comments with a sockpuppet to make it look like people agreed with him because he later accidentally sent someone a message from the wrong account.

    3. Re:Ahhh.... by WrecklessSandwich · · Score: 1

      The worst case of this was the guy that owned r/jailbait and most of the other creepy pedophile shit. He had a close enough relationship with the site admins that they were very much complicit in that activity continuing as long as it did. Dude had a ton of sockpuppets that he would use to upvote his own posts and bury anyone that criticized him. Reddit groupthink being what it is (which is very much a product of how the site is structured, not related to TFA), he had a pretty significant vocal minority of the userbase convinced that masturbating to the stolen vacation photos of underage girls is socially acceptable behavior by hiding behind the godawful broken internet libertarian misinterpretation of what "free speech" means that's so popular over there.

      It was pretty bizarre to see people publicly lament the closing of r/jailbait as some sort of great tragedy of internet censorship taking place on their beloved "free speech site". Sadly, that's what's possible when you give a bunch of people with a (generally frowned upon) shared interest an echo chamber where they can validate and reinforce each other's behavior and silence anyone that disagrees.

  7. They all do it. by Titan1080 · · Score: 0

    I heard this is also how World of Warcraft subscriptions stay so outrageously high.

    1. Re:They all do it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure that the FTC would frown on falsifying data given to shareholders.

      I somehow doubt that there are a sizable number of WoW accounts that are just opened by Blizzard themselves.

    2. Re:They all do it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Probably not, but I know a few guilds that are staffed primarily by dupe accounts. I.E. people playing 5-10 accounts at once.

    3. Re:They all do it. by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      People do it all the time, but from the perspective of Blizzard's bottom-line it isn't a huge deal. That person still pays for each of the accounts, so the only real difference is that unlike with 5 people (each with one account), all 5 accounts could disappear at once if the person quits. That is a downside, but not enough that it merits bothering much with, imo.

      --
      "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
    4. Re:They all do it. by kenwd0elq · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Duplicate ACCOUNTS? Unlikely; you have to PAY for accounts. But each real cash-paying player may have up to 50 different ALTernate characters. You just can't have all of them online at once.

    5. Re:They all do it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Multi-boxing has always been common thing in MMOs, for some people if they can justify $14.99 a month for the majority of your entertainment $44.97 doesn't seem to bad ever. It is becoming even more common now that the F2P model is really taking off the barrier to entry is lower to do so.

    6. Re:They all do it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OK, here you go; [ZIP]

    7. Re:They all do it. by kenwd0elq · · Score: 1

      Color me astonished; I like playing WoW, but not enough to pay $5,700 per year to do it. I suspect that he's one of the very few who is that idio\\\\dedicated to do so.

  8. shocking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    the biggest collection of self-important douchebags on the internet was started using self-important douchebaggery?

    never saw that coming.

    1. Re:shocking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We're talking about Reddit, not Slashdot.

    2. Re:shocking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Slashdot is small potatoes. this is maybe the 10th or 11th largest collection of self-important douchebags

    3. Re:shocking by Johann+Lau · · Score: 1

      I know you are; but what am I talking about?

  9. Matchmaking sites do the same thing by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You can buy a turnkey matchmaking site, complete with a few thousand profiles to get things going. These profiles will even send messages to your "real" users. You can toggle a switch to choose if your users have to pay to see the message, pay to reply, or whatever. There's nothing wrong with what reddit did, even if it went against their own terms of service. What's the phrase..."by any means necessary".

    --
    Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    1. Re:Matchmaking sites do the same thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yup. racial equality merits the same morality as a bunch of flabby white guys' startup...

      I wouldn't mind, but when one of them buys an island after 20 years after the same greedy ethics, I won't want to hear all the bitching about it.

  10. Sentence no parses by neminem · · Score: 0

    Quoth the top post: "These days, with the site's users are wary of people using expendable accounts to try to seed their own content."
    Would someone please explain to me how I'm supposed to parse that sentence? I'm not seeing any way of making it grammatical.

    1. Re:Sentence no parses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Spoken with the pompous pedantry of a true redditor. o_O

    2. Re:Sentence no parses by neminem · · Score: 2

      I'd like to say I've never been to reddit, but that's no longer true: I quite enjoyed Mr. Skullhead's AMA thread (Skullhead being one of the creators of KoL; I only went to reddit, and for that matter, only learned what "AMA" meant, because Skully announced it to the whole kingdom that he was doing one.)

      Haven't been back since, though. Anyway, since when is requesting that sentences be grammatical English, a sign of pomposity? (Pedantry perhaps. Though, I think of myself as a staunch descriptivist!)

    3. Re:Sentence no parses by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      communication occurred, forcing it into a protocol ex post facto is pointless.

      --
      Good-bye
    4. Re:Sentence no parses by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      Really? Your english skills are so bad you can't pull the obvious meaning from that? You can't work out a word to drop to handle the author changing their train of thought in the middle?

      I guess my X skills are worse than your English skills since clearly X must be your first language.

  11. In other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    A Nasdaq cofounder admitted today that their site was built by a horde of fake accountants.

  12. You mean to tell me... by Hatta · · Score: 5, Funny

    There are real people behind those posts now?

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    1. Re:You mean to tell me... by i+kan+reed · · Score: 1

      There are real people behind those posts now?

      Close, there's redditors.

  13. How is this a surprise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The Reddit groupthink is pretty overpowering. I wouldn't be surprised if there are still a horde of fake accounts designed to upvote politically favored things and downvote badthink articles right into the memory hole.

    1. Re:How is this a surprise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's likely what Conde Nast wants people to think since they own the site.

    2. Re:How is this a surprise? by SCHecklerX · · Score: 1

      Wish I could upvote this spot-on comment.

    3. Re:How is this a surprise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not anymore, Reddit was spun off into an independent entity last year.

    4. Re:How is this a surprise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are, it's just orgs/people using bots now though.

  14. Not really new news by AEton · · Score: 2, Informative
    --
    We recently had heard in the office over one of the Yellow Machine that's made by Anthology Solutions.
    1. Re:Not really new news by Johann+Lau · · Score: 2

      you went through the trouble of finding that post (which has zero replies and therefore doesn't indicate any discussion having taken place btw)... just so you can show off how little this interests you? hahahaha.... yeah, hackernews. *pats head*

    2. Re:Not really new news by nazsco · · Score: 1

      No, he didn't search because there's no search at hn. Pg wants it to be like 4Chan.

      He tried to submit it there for karma whoring and got denied because it was already posted, hence he tried to karma whore here

  15. This is news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How is this news? I thought this was common knowledge? This has been generally known for YEARS -- and I don't even use Reddit.

  16. So Reddit was populated entirely by sockpuppets? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, that explains why bonch likes it so much.

  17. just another flash in the pan by Stalyn · · Score: 1

    With this new web 3.3 society it seems people get intensely focused on one site only to migrate to a newer site. Remember Digg? Remember Slashdot? Reddit will get replaced, it's only a matter of time. For me I'm going back to usenet and gopher.

    --
    The best education consists in immunizing people against systematic attempts at education. - Paul Feyerabend
    1. Re:just another flash in the pan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      I preferred Web 3.11 for Workgroups instead.

    2. Re:just another flash in the pan by serviscope_minor · · Score: 5, Funny

      With this new web 3.3 society

      You must have some kind of pre-release. I'm still on web 2.0.4-RC2. I think the 3.x series has more we- scale techonlogies like nosql and cloud. That will allow us to leverage javascript on every teir to make a thicker thin client with rich apps using HTML6 technology with XML for unstructured social tags. This is perfect for enterprise.

      I'm looking forward to the upgrade.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    3. Re:just another flash in the pan by horza · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Digg was destroyed by its owner. Slashdot and Reddit survive by... well doing nothing. How long did Slashdot go with it's appalling mess of code? And the moment they tried to clean things up including the interface... nothing but complaints! Sometimes if it ain't broke don't fix it (except secretly behind the scenes). Hell, I live in France where fax is still more respected than email.

      The only reason Slashdot is dying is dilution. Nobody wants to watch TV, we don't have time, and the previous poor quality of submissions and editing was border-line acceptable as it served as a trigger-point for a lively comments thread but the pollution of slashvertisement by timothy etc makes reading bitching threads tiresome.

      Getting momentum is tough. I don't think Slashdot or Reddit are going anywhere for now. However as the spectacular demise of Digg shows, things can change pretty quickly.

      Phillip.

    4. Re:just another flash in the pan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's pretty feeble. Google is already up to web 17.0

      Get a clue, loosers!

    5. Re:just another flash in the pan by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Digg tried to kill themselves four times. They just got better at it as they went along. Part of their charm was their noobishness. They were known for it. Periodically re-engineering the discussion system to make it worse, presumably to make their noob members feel at home. It was weird and low rent and they finally put themselves out of their misery.

    6. Re:just another flash in the pan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was for 3.2, In 3.3 it is nosql and nocloud, powering noweb solutions.

      Nocloud and nowev is the future, man!

    7. Re:just another flash in the pan by DeathElk · · Score: 1

      What's a Digg? And I do care about my lawn. And I am a bit drunk. It shows. I'll just turn off the computer now an snuggle up with my MIRF.

    8. Re:just another flash in the pan by mangu · · Score: 2

      Well, FWIW Slashdot has done a lot of effort to kill themselves by trying so much to eliminate the trolls.

      When I first came here I had seen several discussion forums before, but what caught my attention was how, from time to time, a really funny troll appeared from nowhere.

      Slashdot without trolls is rather bland and uninteresting.

  18. Same with their up/down voting by LulzAndOrder · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Still today, if you pay attention, you can tell that the tone of the site is maintained by editorial up/down voting. I know, because my tone they hate and it consistently gets one downvote. Not a lot, just the two needed to make it negative. Then if people reply to me, that discussion is not manipulated, but that comment that started my thread sticks with the negative one. It happens over and over. Regular folks can swoop in and pour more ups or downs, but more often than not, there is a "first psas" (ha ha First!) that zooms through right away and keeps the 'jerk tone pristine. Used to be that way on Slashdot too, you can tell by how quickly the needle moves to where it "wants" to be. I don't know any more, I don't pay attention or post.

    1. Re:Same with their up/down voting by Johann+Lau · · Score: 1

      hah, that's nothing. try hackernews.

    2. Re:Same with their up/down voting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Maybe you're just an asshole and, indeed, nobody cares about what you have to say.

    3. Re:Same with their up/down voting by ffflala · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I know, because my tone they hate and it consistently gets one downvote. Not a lot, just the two needed to make it negative . . . . more often than not, there is a "first psas" (ha ha First!) that zooms through right away and keeps the 'jerk tone pristine.

      I'm curious: how would you characterize your "tone"? Maybe I'm reading you wrong, but it sounds like you're describing your own tone as that of a jerk.

      If that's the case, it just sounds like effective & efficient modding.

    4. Re:Same with their up/down voting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Augh, I'm out of mod points, so everybody look at this reply and mentally add +1 Insightful. Everybody should shut the fuck up about 10 times a day and ponder quietly to themselves "Maybe I'm just an asshole?" Do not continue posting on the Internet until you can demonstrate to yourself (to at least 2 sig figs) that you are not.

    5. Re:Same with their up/down voting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Please take your own advice.

    6. Re:Same with their up/down voting by steelfood · · Score: 1

      The +4 Interesting mod on GP says otherwise.

      It's one thing to downmod comments because they're not constructive towards the discussion. It's altogether another thing to downmod individuals completely (though it happens all the time, in the form of credibility in real life, and karma on /.).

      Still, I expect even trolls have interesting things to say once in a while.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    7. Re:Same with their up/down voting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its not really a secret that the Ycombinator insiders have supermod powers. They also hellban a lot of people. Relevant because they funded Reddit and there's a big crossover.

      In ye olden days, Slashdot used to have users with infinite points (and perhaps they still do?)

    8. Re:Same with their up/down voting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think they would like you in r/conspiracy, but judging by this comment; I'm not surprised you've concocted this theory from basically nothing.

    9. Re:Same with their up/down voting by craznar · · Score: 1

      When you have +2000 over a week, then -4000 in one day, it is hard to imagine it has anything to do with what I'm saying.

      I am just not that important.

      --
      EMail: 0110001101100010010000000110001101110010 0110000101111010011011100110000101110010 0010111001100011011011110110
    10. Re:Same with their up/down voting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      And if you mention the ongoing project of genocide directed at white people, you can expect a million downvotes from white anti-white cultural marxists.

      EU should 'undermine national homogeneity' says UN migration chief

      “You’re (white people) on the endangered list. And unlike, say, the bald eagle or some exotic species of muskrat, you are not worth saving. In forty years or so, maybe fewer, there won’t be any more white people around.” – Tim Wise, “anti-racist activist”

      “The key to solving the social problems of our age is to abolish the White race.” – Noel Ignatiev, Harvard Professor

      “Is it the duty of every good revolutionary to kill every newborn White baby?” – A member of the Weather Underground

      UNACCEPTABLE: “Affirmative action and racial quotas are special treatment for minorities.”
      ACCEPTABLE: “Affirmative action and racial quotas are necessary to overcome the legacy of slavery which is still keeping any non-Asian minority from succeeding in Post-Racial America. Besides, white people are all rich, connected, and racially privileged, so the very notion of treating them unfairly is racist and stupid, and you are racist and stupid for saying it.”

      UNACCEPTABLE: “There’s black people out there, rioting, looting, and setting fire to grocery stores!”
      ACCEPTABLE: “Although partially blinded by my white privilege, I think I see some oppressed minorities fighting back against institutional racism, seeking social justice through involuntary reparations, and opening a combustion-based dialogue with the Korean community.”

      UNACCEPTABLE: “Black men just keep raping white women at a ridiculously high rate.”
      ACCEPTABLE: “Today’s race-conscious African-American male seeks to overcome historical barriers to inter-racial unions, as well as discriminatory female consent practices.”

    11. Re:Same with their up/down voting by LulzAndOrder · · Score: 1, Interesting
      you did read it wrong :) but plenty of people do think i'm a jerk, and plenty of people don't.

      I wrote 'jerk with an apostrophe as a shortening of circlejerk, meaning the site likes its own circlejerk tone, and tries to maintain it.

      They downvote me because of the following: I read sites like these for learning and for humor. Most of the time, i just lurk, or really, just read along enjoying the jokes, learning here or there, and ignoring the noise. If I agree with what's being said, why comment, right? However, when somebody says something that is both wrong/uneducated, and I can tell it's emotional, bigoted, and antithetical and intolerant of things I believe in, then I get motivated to set the record straight in a way that "does not suffer fools" (yeah i realize that's not very grammatical, im lzy). As an example, I think the various Occupy movements are retarded, which is ok, it's ok to be retarded, but coupled with their venom or selfrighteousness...

      I get plenty of positive karma for many things I write (i'm pretty smart and pretty well educated); karmawise I'm way net positive; and I participate in friendly back and forths with people I disagree with. However, if I "put an uneducated slob in his place", that collects a -1, and very quickly. If it were reader passion that was driving it, you'd expect more downvotes over time as more people see it, and you'd expect more downvotes on the rest of the thread. But for a certain kind of post that I make to repeatedly and quickly zoom to it's final number, and for a it to consistently be the "hinge" of a subthread means it's not governed by Poisson arrival times, and it's not passion. (clever eh, neither passion nor Poisson) My humor often gets upvoted, my informative posts often get upvoted (still talking about reddit here) but my tart rejoinders get a very precise treatment.

      And btw, I rarely write stuff like this, because when i figure out a good indicator that something "is a lie", why teach the liar how to improve? Some of you are thinking "oh, like reddit cares what it says in this thread"... believe me, they are poring over it.

    12. Re:Same with their up/down voting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you sound like such a conceited asshole.

    13. Re:Same with their up/down voting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I had mod points I would mode this "overrated".

    14. Re:Same with their up/down voting by ffflala · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Well I can think of a few simpler explanations for your experience than your claim, but I believe that you'd just find them insulting and it would shut down this exchange. So in the hope of being constructive, I will suggest an slight tweak to your approach. Try this for a week or so, and if you still run into the immediate -1 mods. If you do? Well there goes my theory, maybe you're onto something. But if you find that the downvotes disappear (as I suspect they will), well I'll leave it to you to draw your own conclusions.

      (W)hen somebody says something that is both wrong/uneducated, and I can tell it's emotional, bigoted, and antithetical and intolerant of things I believe in, then I get motivated to set the record straight in a way that "does not suffer fools"

      It's this shit right here that sounds to me like prime downvote bait. Here's the suggestion: next time you see something both wrong/uneducated, something that is emotional, bigoted, antithetical, and intolerant of the things you believe in, try a minor variation on your approach to setting the record straight. No need to "suffer fools" as you put it, but just stick to disputing the something they posted. Do not --no matter how strongly a negative reaction it provokes in you-- belittle, embarrass, or try insult the *person*, even by implication (such as "only idiots would think that.") Whatever you own conclusions about the person might be, don't post them. Just disagree --as vehemently as you prefer-- and explain why you disagree.

      Attack the argument, not the person -- even if they're attacking others and/or you. It can be a subtle distinction, but this is the difference between civilized-but-lively debate and ego-wanking.

    15. Re:Same with their up/down voting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      A lot of dumb people think they're pretty smart. The number of individuals in the group does not have to be large for at least one to be smarter than you (you could generalize from the birthday paradox).

      It is not a measure of intelligence to 'put fools in their place'. It is wrestling with a pig. When you can, stick to facts. When you don't have facts, stick to logic. When the person you're arguing with has a fundamentally different view of truth as you (e.g. skepticism vs religion), appeal to emotion. Connect with your reader, and your opponent if possible. When your argument is lost, cut your losses. This can mean preemptively censoring yourself. Often. Please.

      Everyone in this world is a fool. Some of us have a small idea of the limits of our knowledge. If you wish to be influential (or at least upmoderated) you must to be polite to fools. Because, cher ami, you most certainly are one.

      What you have identified is not a flaw in the system, it is a flaw in your "tone", by which we mean a social failure. You have the capacity to correct this. If you don't, no one will ever care, and that will be your punishment, Cassandra. Although really it's far more likely that you'll just be another angry idiot.

    16. Re:Same with their up/down voting by Johann+Lau · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't mind stuff getting voted down, any reader worth their salt reads at -1 (or highlights text on HN) anyway. But hellbanning for fuck all? Slowbanning for even less, for basically "not cheering instantly" --- wow haha. I'm a potty mouth, and I can see how my first accounts were expelled, but seriously, from then on I tried to behave better, but just for disagreeing or pointing out hypocrisy --- BAM, slowban, then log out and you realize your posts don't even show up for anyone. It's so petty and stupid it's hilarious. "Spammers and trolls" my ass -- that's a spineless echo chamber if I've ever seen one. And they even call themselves hacker news of all things.

      Oh well, fuck these clowns. It kinda made me realize how good slashdot is all over again (you can say what you want about it, but at least it's not squeamish and deceptive); I'm just "ranting" about it here because well, I can't do it there :P

    17. Re:Same with their up/down voting by Johann+Lau · · Score: 0

      "I'm not surprised you've concocted this theory from basically nothing."

      it's based on their experience; on the other hand, what is your theory, that they made it up, based on? oh that's right, you just made it up. that's not exactly surprising either.

    18. Re:Same with their up/down voting by Fred+Ferrigno · · Score: 2

      but plenty of people do think i'm a jerk, and plenty of people don't.

      Mystery solved, then. The people who think you're a jerk are going to down vote you every time. The people who don't think you're a jerk may not vote at all.

    19. Re:Same with their up/down voting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      One doesn't "put an uneducated slob in his place". That makes the person bitter, causes him to believe more strongly in the belief now that he has had to defend himself and if he was wrong then he wasted all that effort and would look foolish, and makes him hate you. Instead one helps to gently raise him/her up to a higher level.

      If you'd like to convince people of the value of your arguments and point of view, please keep the above in mind.

      If you want /. to agree/disagree with you and tell you why, post a link to your Reddit posts. It's faster to show us your tone instead of in trying to put it in words and have us guess.

    20. Re:Same with their up/down voting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not super active at HN, but there's certain posting styles they don't like for well-founded reasons. Filter Slashdot at +5 and it's full of flamebait, trolls, assholery, factually incorrect posts, etc. This place has it's charm, but not for the moderation system.

    21. Re:Same with their up/down voting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your argument is flawed (and I have no doubt that it is because you are flawed as a human being but you said I should not say that).

      I have explained, and you have not, why there are precisely two downvotes on only a small number of my posts to take them from a default +1 to -1.

      I didn't say that I wanted things to be different so I should learn from you, I said that from the data I'd accumulated by accident, I could tell that they have an editorial system.

    22. Re:Same with their up/down voting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't get a million downvotes. I get precisely two, and I don't get them on subsequent things I write, just the first in a chain, how stupid are you?

    23. Re:Same with their up/down voting by ffflala · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I was trying to be polite, but I suppose I'll have to be blunt. Your description leaves a much more plausible explanation than your claim that a group of editors tracks every new post for some proper "tone" that you occasionally are just too rebellious to match.

      It seems much, *much* more likely to me that instead, you occasionally come off like a self-righteous, unbearably narcissistic ass who grossly overestimates his own cleverness and the value of his opinion, and whose comments, once modded to -1, simply aren't worth wasting any time nor effort moderating further. In other words, people --occasionally-- simply aren't that interested in bothering with what you have to say on those occasions when you feel justified in acting out.

    24. Re:Same with their up/down voting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reddit's biggest problem is that 2 early downvotes can completely kill a discussion (lots of people will just remove a comment if it's voted to -1 to avoid an avalanche of negative karma. This is abused by people who know that fact and love to cause havoc. Watch carefully, and you'll see some threads where every post gets -1 or worse.

      To fix reddit, remove the downvote button.

    25. Re:Same with their up/down voting by Johann+Lau · · Score: 1

      ORLY? They also seem to have posting "styles" they dislike for no well-founded reason which they censor -- which IS assholery, of the weakest kind, just so happens to be the kind they approve of, like fish who don't notice they're swimming in water -- and you seem to be confusing the two.

    26. Re:Same with their up/down voting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you sound like such a conceited asshole.

      An anonymous conceited asshole.

    27. Re:Same with their up/down voting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know, because my tone they hate and it consistently gets one downvote. Not a lot, just the two needed to make it negative.

      Probably because Reddit fuzzes the votes. It's impossible to have a completely positive-voted comment. This is done to make bots/spammers unable to know that they're silently banned.

    28. Re:Same with their up/down voting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Something about hammers, nails and heads.

    29. Re:Same with their up/down voting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Based upon your smug and arrogant "tone" in your lengthy postings, about putting "fools in their place", I find it totally understandable that reddit moderators quickly remove you out of direct sight with a couple of downvotes. You harrasing their clientele, with your superior intelligence and people skills like a putrid donkey's ass, is detrimental to their business.

      Oh well, you still have lots of money to make up for your utter failing as a group animal.

    30. Re:Same with their up/down voting by oddfox · · Score: 2

      I can't imagine why a jagoff like you gets downvoted on Reddit. Oh wait, I can, it's because you take a lot of text and time to say a lot of bullpucky amounting to nothing of real value. The fact that you got modded up for posting conspiratorial drivel is kind of worrying, but I guess a lot of people here on /. really do want to think they're being silenced by "the man", whoever or whatever "the man" may be for a particular website. Honestly, you're not nearly as important to the people that run the site or the various sub-reddits that you seem to believe you are.

      --
      "We invented personal computing." - Bill Gates
    31. Re:Same with their up/down voting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they downvote one particular post in one particular circumstance

      And that circumstance is when you act like a jerk.

    32. Re:Same with their up/down voting by Tyndmyr · · Score: 2

      People who post as you claim to are prime candidates for me to downvote here. I can't imagine that reddit is any different. Trying to work in personal insults or assuming the OP is a fool is a great way to come across as offensive.

      --
      Support more choices in goverment-Vote 3rd party.
    33. Re:Same with their up/down voting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you're an idiot: your statement makes no sense.

      I don't get a lot of downvotes every time, I get exactly two in short order, and more response posts than that.

    34. Re:Same with their up/down voting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People do go to the trouble to reply to my posts, and I get votes including ups on my reply posts, and those posts follow the same tone but do not get downvoted.

      You have not addressed the data, and you are biased by your dislike of me and my style into a skepticism that can't be justified by anything but your emotions. I don't care if you are polite or not, I simply care if you are smart or not, and so far you haven't impressed me. According to you, people can't be bothered to downvote my initial post any more after it very quickly gets two downvotes, but a larger number of them can be bothered to reply to it on a Poisson schedule, and to vote up and down those subsequent posts on a Poisson schedule? That's nonsense.

      sorry I made you feel bad, if you felt better I'm sure you could see your logical failure.

    35. Re:Same with their up/down voting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People do write me replies, though, as I said, a discussion thread ensues. So, crybaby, your comment is not insightful at all.

      People do care to discuss, but the -1 needle doesn't move on the first post.

  19. Fake /. comment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Setting the desired tone? Gates bad. Torvalds good. Portman hot. Jobs cool.

    1. Re:Fake /. comment by jalet · · Score: 5, Funny

      > Setting the desired tone? Gates bad. Torvalds good. Portman hot. Jobs cold.

      FTFY

      --
      Votez ecolo : Chiez dans l'urne !
    2. Re:Fake /. comment by niktemadur · · Score: 1

      > Gates bad. Torvalds good. Portman pants, grits hot. Jobs cold.

      FTFTFY

      --
      Lil' Thindime, lilting a lacrimose lament, krashes the kwaint konfines of Kokonino Kounty
    3. Re:Fake /. comment by oodaloop · · Score: 4, Funny

      Burma Shave

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    4. Re:Fake /. comment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...and thanks for reminding me why I don't read this site anymore. Portman and grits, in 2012, really? FFS.

    5. Re:Fake /. comment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, and don't forget the worship if scum like Assange...
      That a majority of users pirate software and music...
      Some are even stupid to post links to LOIC to get people to "join" Anonymous...

  20. Re:So Reddit was populated entirely by sockpuppets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ok, we get it, you have a giant hard-on for this bonch guy. We don't need to hear about it every Slashdot article.

  21. Re:So Reddit was populated entirely by sockpuppets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey bonch. Haven't seen you in a while. Thought maybe your head got so stuck up your ass you'd suffocated. Oh well...

  22. When you pretend thing are one way, while secretly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    are another.
    Fraud, in other words.

  23. 4chan called it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Although there is a running joke on 4chan that "there are only two users on this site: moot and this guy named Anonymous who is a real asshole."

  24. Oh, Reddit.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So when they started out they intentionally wanted reddit to be a cesspool of misogyny, memes, in-jokes and teenagers? Cool.

    1. Re:Oh, Reddit.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't forget child porn and racism!

  25. Re:So Reddit was populated entirely by sockpuppets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually, bonch and his sockpuppets are remarkably effective for slashdot user engagement. A first post which is an obvious troll can generate a reply chain of 50-60 responses, even on a 'boring' topic that might otherwise get under 100 normal replies. So there is the argument for having users who can stir the pot.

  26. Stop The Presses! - by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > Reddit was built by and remains under the control of samefags

    lol some community

  27. Fake it 'til you make it by c0lo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I hear that sex life is like this as well. Can anyone confirm please?

    --
    Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
  28. digg.com by p51d007 · · Score: 1, Funny

    So, reddit is admitting they are as fake as digg.com? LOL, dropped both sites a few years back.

  29. Illegal? by multimediavt · · Score: 1

    Wouldn't what they did constitute fraud and manipulation and put them in an actionable position from their advertisers and/or actual human users, if not criminal in some locales? It's wholly unethical at best and I have been asked to create fake accounts and posts by some of my web clients and have told them so. That's just so wrong on so many levels.

    1. Re:Illegal? by Lehk228 · · Score: 2

      if the fake accounts were loading ads, yes, otherwise no way

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    2. Re:Illegal? by multimediavt · · Score: 1

      if the fake accounts were loading ads, yes, otherwise no way

      I'm sorry, but I'm not gonna buy that from anyone who isn't a lawyer, and that might be true where you live but might not in every locale. If you pretend to be something else for monetary gain with the express purpose of manipulation, that's fraud. Not acting, fraud. Something tells me this admission by the co-founder may come back to bite him and Reddit. I know I will never go there after this. BTW, how do you separate fake account posts and non-fake posts from ads when they appear on the same page? I've been developing websites for a long time and don't know a way to do that. You can have ads not appear for some users, but the ads will display to everyone else that also has a post on the page. So, yeah, fraud. And you can't tell me they "filtered" out their hits from the impressions either, or did they tell all their advertisers that some of their posts were fake? Yeah, right.

    3. Re:Illegal? by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      who was defrauded? advertisers paid a certain amount per ad impression, or per ad click, and got the amount they paid for.

      luring people under false pretenses to a website is not fraud otherwise goatse would be in prison

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
  30. Reddit hosts child porn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Huh... I would have thought after the semi-debacle that occurred when people exposed Reddit for having subreddits where people openly traded child porn while administrators tacitly stood by and said nothing, that nothing could make me think less of Reddit. I guess this just proves that the site's operators have been disingenuous scumbags since the very beginning.

    1. Re:Reddit hosts child porn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The question is, does the child porn stuff still seem as bad now that you know it was just one reddit admin with a bunch of fake accounts trading kiddy porn with herself.

  31. Much like starting anything else by mea_culpa · · Score: 3, Interesting

    A computer operating system requires a bootstrapper to load it into memory before it can run.
    An engine on an automobile or aircraft requires rotation by an external source before it can power itself.
    A business requires capital before it can generate its own.
    A social media site requires 'social media' before it can launch.

  32. Ghost towns.. by jmerlin · · Score: 2

    I loathe the idea of ever living in New York City but would love to live in a ghost town. You know what they say about assumptions, man!

  33. Reddit has jumped the shark by SCHecklerX · · Score: 1

    The general population of redditors and their self-masturbatory attention whoring has become annoying enough that I don't bother any more. I used to waste hours a day there, but the signal/noise ratio has turned decidedly flamboyant hipster. The resulting Imgur postings each day, however, are still worth watching, so I just subscribe to those feeds. Funny/Sexy/Nerdy content without the self-pleasuring drivel. Much better way to 'reddit'.

    1. Re:Reddit has jumped the shark by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You could of course change your set of subreddits to better suit your wishes instead of circlejerking about it here on /.

  34. Since they got their first real user today by slazzy · · Score: 2

    They can remove the fake accounts!

    --
    Website Just Down For Me? Find out
  35. never heard of reddit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    who and what is reddit? Never heard of this huge great site lol

  36. Uhh... why is this news? by v3xt0r · · Score: 2

    In the course of developing a large, scalable, social networking application, one aspect of this is 'Stress Testing', in which, common sense dictates that you need to set-up a staging environment with fake users, and scripts (aka: bots) that act as users interacting with the system.

    The fact that they used this practice in production to get attention or mislead and entice real people to use their system, is not that surprising, or un-common. The real news here is that the majority of reddit users are, and have always been, complete morons.

    --
    the only permanence in existence, is the impermanence of existence.
  37. Nothing new here... by beaverdownunder · · Score: 1

    'Social' sites have been seeding themselves since the beginning. Nobody really wants to join a ghost-town, and no site-owner really wants a free-for-all.

    This is less a 'revelation' and more just an acknowledgement of what everyone savvy knew was going on anyway.

  38. Confirmation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, getting a sex life is exactly the same just with a different set of rules.

    The first rule is: The more sex you have, the more sex you will get.
    The reasoning here is that the more sex you have, the more pheromones you produce. These pheromones then make others around you more interested in you sexually.

    So, if you have no partner to have sex with, playing with yourself can increase your own sex drive, drive up the level of hormones you produce, increase the changes of that people you stood next to in the elevator salivating and jumping you (always try to hit the emergency stop button if this happen as coitus interruptus sucks) and as a side benefit gives you a measure of relief.

    Unfortunately, it can also put you into a terminal feedback loop where you are never satisfied and are always horny. Such is life. When you reach this point, however, your standards will drop and you will be tempted to shag anything or indeed anyone below your normal level of acceptance.

    So, starting out on your own "faking it" by playing with your "joystiq" or "tunnel of love" can very well lead to a sex life that involves others.

    Alternatively you could become life me and discover that having a well paid job, casual sex on the side when you need it, no kids, a house paid off in record time and no significant drain on your income other than casual dating and life events is far better than the marriage alternative. YMMV

  39. How did they make the video? Software / Video by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I LOVE how they made the video and would like to do something similar.

    Anyone have any specifics on how they created it so the hand is in the screen capture?

    So far I can tell it's a wacom tablet but what's the software & method. Chromakey on the tablet surface?

  40. Golden era of Reddit by Bonobo_Unknown · · Score: 3, Insightful

    In other words, the Golden Era of Reddit where there was supposedly more intelectual discussions, content and the lack to rage comics and cat pictures was all fake? Now that Reddit has actual users it's just a shit as 4chan?

    --
    We don't believe in radical loony monotheistic religions from the middle east -- we're Christians.
    1. Re:Golden era of Reddit by McDutchie · · Score: 1

      No. In the first few weeks, when the fake account operated, Reddit didn't even have comments (as you could have learned from watching the video).

    2. Re:Golden era of Reddit by Pope · · Score: 1

      I guess all those /jailbait pictures were fakes.

      --
      It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
  41. Haha by LucyMary · · Score: 0

    I have 3 Reddit accounts! And you ?

    --
    I really love club dresses ,
  42. Turing Test by geoffrobinson · · Score: 1

    Is this a Turing Test or something?

    --
    Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
    1. Re:Turing Test by mlk · · Score: 1

      What makes you ask "Is this a Turing Test or something?"?

      --
      Wow, I should not post when knackered.
  43. Yep, I wear the T shirt with pride. by VortexCortex · · Score: 1

    Because I've always known it was true: Everyone else on the Internet is just one big fat guy.

  44. Common Password or Fake Accounts by ZombieBraintrust · · Score: 1

    Ever notice some of the common passwords revealed in the password hacks are kind of not that common. Why would 40 accounts have the password Michael and another 40 accounts have the password Jordon? Fake accounts with common passwords duh.

  45. Did they write it using JBOSS? by tomhath · · Score: 1

    That would make the circle complete.

  46. Get your popcorn ready.... by Cute+Fuzzy+Bunny · · Score: 1

    ... because somewhere along the line someone gave them money based on their success, which appears to have been faked for some period of time.

    Fire up your lawsuits and get the popcorn ready.

  47. Harder for guys by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is harder for guys to "fake it". Finding an excuse to properly heat the yogurt is just plain tough.

  48. Re:So Reddit was populated entirely by sockpuppets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nice rationalizing there, bonch, but not so much when it's mostly offtopic, misleading bullshit that those 50-60 responses are correcting.

  49. They still do that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is still that way with a lot of accounts.
    andrewsmith for instance

  50. That's how we got listeners to call talk radio by efalk · · Score: 1

    Back in my college radio days, we learned that the best way to get a call-in show rolling was to prime the pump with a number of calls made by station staff themselves.

  51. Depression Comix by Hyperhaplo · · Score: 1
    --
    You have a sick, twisted mind. Please subscribe me to your newsletter.
  52. reddit sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    reddit is a pro athiest, pro liberal site. religion and conservative issues get voted down so the only spot light you see is when they are mocking it. a fair blog has views from all of society, since gallup poll indicate most americans have christian belief - if reddit was fair then the blog would reflect a lot more of conservative values instead of bashing them all the time. redditors often mis quote the bible and i had to often correct them in their pride of knowing it all- but knowing little about the bible.
    the same went for issues of abortion and homosexuality, they promote it.

    after reading the manipulation that the site creators , it is now clear that the site was promoting liberalism while silencing conservatism - it is called selective democracy. we want this group to be heard, but we will silence this group. that is why i left reddit. it promotes evil, the people on it are on the verge of insanity and they love it as long as the party keeps going. however, the drug user always runs out and when reality hits, they have to pay for their sin.