Slashdot Mirror


Reddit Bans Subreddits Related To Selling Guns, Drugs, Sex, and More (bloomberg.com)

New submitter cornholed writes: Yesterday, Reddit updated their Content Policy forbidding transactions for certain goods and services. From the formal announcement on Reddit: "As of today, users may not use Reddit to solicit or facilitate any transaction or gift involving certain goods and services, including: firearms, ammunition, or explosives; drugs, including alcohol and tobacco, or any controlled substances (except advertisements placed in accordance with our advertising policy); paid services involving physical sexual contact; stolen goods; personal information; falsified official documents or currency." Bloomberg has an interesting write-up on how Reddit is wading into the gun control debate. See this post on Reddit for a full-list of all subreddits banned. "Reddit has been something of a Wild West for users building communities by curating and commenting on content in subreddits," reports Bloomberg. "Sometimes, as in the case with gun sales, marketplaces emerge in the course of conversations within specific communities. With Reddit's increased popularity -- the site is the sixth-most-visited in the world -- has come introspection and stricter content guidelines. The company recognizes its responsibility for having provided a platform for hate groups to flourish and, more recently, the possibility that Russian propaganda on the site may have played a role in influencing the 2016 presidential election."

50 of 277 comments (clear)

  1. time to bring back USENET? :) by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 4, Insightful

    USENET is/was a purely peer-to-peer system with no effective censorship. The downside to this, of course, was massive quantities of spam, which killed it. If someone could effectively solve the spam issue without censoring...

    1. Re:time to bring back USENET? :) by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It just needs a moderation protocol on top of it. Let people subscribe to what ever moderation service they want to read USENET with.

    2. Re:time to bring back USENET? :) by alvinrod · · Score: 2

      Ah but that's the beauty of it though. You can just us a moderation service that filters out whining and spam.

    3. Re:time to bring back USENET? :) by mysidia · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What we need is Catered censors ---- In other words, censors who are Approved by the group they are censoring, For example:
        in a "Gun Sales forum" --- the censors would act according to the wishes of THAT community and not be subject to the OVERALL Public opinion or scrutiny by a Corporate overlord, And then: effective means in place of monitoring the usage and cancelling or revoking the censorship powers in the event that one of the approved censors becomes rogue and starts going against the desires of THAT PARTICULAR community.

      PROBABLY the idea would be to have a means of marking spam so it's hidden by default, But concerned citizens can turn on an advanced feature and see all the "Deleted" or "Censored" messages.

    4. Re:time to bring back USENET? :) by zieroh · · Score: 2

      Isn't this essentially what reddit already has? Community moderators on a per-subreddit basis?

      --
      People who say "sheeple" have about as much sophistication as an AOL user, and in fact are probably actually AOL users.
    5. Re:time to bring back USENET? :) by mysidia · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Isn't this essentially what reddit already has? Community moderators on a per-subreddit basis?

      Yes... Unfortunately reddit also has Site Admins who can exercise independent authority over any Post, Article, and can even destroy an entire Sub. And the unwanted censorship actions are coming from the Global Site Admins group, not the moderators.

    6. Re:time to bring back USENET? :) by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 2

      More precisely an "oxymoron" :D

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    7. Re:time to bring back USENET? :) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It also has (had? I don't know) a shitty CEO who modified users' posts.

    8. Re: time to bring back USENET? :) by EETech1 · · Score: 2

      Put the spam on a blockchain, and let the AI train on it.

    9. Re:time to bring back USENET? :) by AHuxley · · Score: 2

      A GUI over Usenet and IRC? With a web cam and mic? Encrypted P2P?
      Its all in the GUI.
      The more a brand attempts to support SJW by banning content, the more the internet gets creative to move around the SJW censorship brands.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    10. Re:time to bring back USENET? :) by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 2

      Then they can unsubscribe from that 'moderation server' and subscribe to another one.

      Everyone talking at once in one place would be great, let people choose what filter they want to see the world through.

    11. Re:time to bring back USENET? :) by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 2

      Most nntp servers have hooks for hooks to check content.

      Just make sure that every post is at an 8th grade reading level.

      Offer paid 'moderation services'. For $1/month you can get a 'white list' of comments to fetch and read and all of the spam gets modded immediately at -10 because they don't.

      Or this: https://xkcd.com/810/

    12. Re:time to bring back USENET? :) by BlueStrat · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The complete antithesis to free speech would be if you were forced to spread messages you disagree with.

      Oh, you mean like a baker forced to bake a wedding cake with a pro-same-sex marriage message when it's against his (Christian) religion? (Muslims get a pass)

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    13. Re:time to bring back USENET? :) by bsolar · · Score: 2

      If I remember correctly part of the rationale was that baking a cake does not constitute "expression of free speech", so no "free speech" consideration applies.

    14. Re:time to bring back USENET? :) by JesseMcDonald · · Score: 2

      That was the official rationale, but it doesn't stand up to close scrutiny. Being forced to contribute to someone else's speech is still forced speech. Moreover, issues of free speech aside, being forced to provide any service against your will is slavery.

      --
      "The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." - Bastiat
    15. Re:time to bring back USENET? :) by CanHasDIY · · Score: 2

      Right, because there is absolutely no creativity allowed when baking.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    16. Re:time to bring back USENET? :) by BlueStrat · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I was under the impression that the cake did not have "homosexuality is great" written on it in frosting. If it did, you might have a point. Otherwise you're grasping desperately at straws.

      No, that *was exactly* the point. The bakery and owner in question had served this lesbian couple on multiple occasions prior knowing they were a gay couple. They sold them goods each time with no problem at all. The message on the cake was the sticking-point that went too far. Even then, the baker offered recommendations for other bakeries that he felt were good shops that would have no problem with their message and provide good quality and value.

      That was not good enough and they filed the discrimination complaint. Why are Muslim-owned halal bakeries never challenged? It seems Christians are considered "safe targets" for attacks on their religion but not Muslims in the US. This tells me it's not about principle at all, it's about attacking other's beliefs with which you disagree, but only those others you are confident are too civilized to attack back. It's about bigotry and hatred and not about equal rights and protections.

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    17. Re:time to bring back USENET? :) by Straif · · Score: 2

      But the bakers in question weren't even restricting sales to the couples, merely the special order of a wedding cakes. In at least 2 of these cases the shops in question had already sold to the complaining couples with full knowledge of their sexual orientation. They had no issue with selling to gay couples for normal general goods (general cakes, cookies, cupcakes etc..) it was only the sale of wedding cakes that they refused.

      Wedding cakes are, in almost all cases, special order cakes and take a lot more personalized effort to create. The bakers considered this a form or their artistic expression and as such refused to participate in an act that was against their beliefs. In 2 cases the States decided that a baker could be forced to participate against their will while in the latest case, in California, the judge sided with the baker.

      It's the same as a politician wanting to play a particular artists song at their event. If they choose to pay the licensing fees to the proper company they can play the pre-recorded mp3 to their hearts content, despite the artists protests, but that doesn't mean the artist is obligated to actually appear and play live or even make a special re-mix for them.

      --
      Of course that's just my opinion...... you could be wrong!
  2. The last few days have been strangely coordinated. by asdfman2000 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A lot of these have dropped in the last few days.

    YouTube Bans Firearms Demo Videos
    Citi sets restrictions on gun sales by retail clients by adding arbitrary rules (can only sell to 21+ years-old, no standard capacity magazines, etc)

  3. Re:The last few days have been strangely coordinat by asdfman2000 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Sheep often move en masse, as though there was some coordination in effect.

    Perhaps that's news to you.

    Do you think these policy changes for companies like Citigroup and Youtube happen overnight? I'm sure these companies have been working on these for a while - it's just strange they ALL get announced within 24-48 hours of each other.

    I'm not saying there's a conspiracy. I'm just pointing out the timing is coincidental.

  4. Now all they need.. by Z80a · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Is to ban the sale of rock and roll.

    1. Re:Now all they need.. by KozmoStevnNaut · · Score: 2

      Maybe that would give it back some of the edge it lost over the decades. Rock 'n' roll used to be the devil's music, corrupting our youth and leading them drinking, smoking the Mary J and having pre-marital sex.

      Now it's just the same crap as everything else, being played on corporate radio, completely toothless and lacking any sort of passion and righteous anger.

      I'm not a huge fan of black metal (more into death/doom/power), but I think those freaks have a point. Make music dangerous again.

      --
      Eat the rich.
  5. Re:Meh, meh, meh by MerlTurkin · · Score: 2

    No thanks.

  6. Re:The last few days have been strangely coordinat by geekmux · · Score: 2

    "Citi said that in addition to the policy for new clients, it is starting talks with current clients on their practices and if they do not adopt changes the bank will help “transition their business away from Citi.”

    From a financial standpoint this would be called shooting themselves in the foot.

    Cracks me up when talking about an anti-gun policy.

  7. Re:The last few days have been strangely coordinat by asdfman2000 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "Citi said that in addition to the policy for new clients, it is starting talks with current clients on their practices and if they do not adopt changes the bank will help “transition their business away from Citi.”

    From a financial standpoint this would be called shooting themselves in the foot.

    This is just Citi throwing a minority under the bus for free publicity. From what it looks like, this is only for corporate accounts (that is, if your business uses Citi as your bank). I imagine gun retailers are a drop in the bucket for them.

    The biggest possible hit they'll take is fallout from boycotts from gun groups. Looks like it's already all over social media: https://twitter.com/Citi/statu...

  8. 1956 redux ? by swell · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Those born before Netflix might remember network TV shows with bland family content where you never see naked people or hear swearing. When Lucy, of 'I Love Lucy', got pregnant, she was not allowed to be seen on screen in that condition. We listened to Lawrence Welk music and saw the art of Norman Rockwell on magazine covers. We waved the flag on 4th of July and cheered for our baseball team and joined Boy Scouts. Yes, youngsters, that was life before the internet. We had to read National Geographic magazine to see naked people.

    But why was that so? Because of the Religious Right. Because of the Moral Majority. Because of Puritans who ran the country. But mostly because of advertising sponsors who were afraid to be associated with anything 'immoral'.

    We now swim in porn of all kinds with Game of Thrones and other films by Amazon, Netflix and other new media innovators. We have chat rooms where we are free to swear and say outrageous things. We freely criticize politicians and corporations and media and each other. The internet has freed us from Moral Morons and Patriotic Pimps and Advertising Assholes who suppressed free thought since the Dark Ages.

    But it's happening again. The Wild West internet is gradually coming under the thumb of the Pompous Puritans. Facebook, Twitter and even Reddit are shutting down free speech bit by bit. And yes it's largely due to advertising sponsors and partly due to threats by governments around the world.

    Was Reddit the last major bastion of Free Speech? Is the internet going to become as bland and mindless as 1956 television?

    --
    ...omphaloskepsis often...
    1. Re:1956 redux ? by zieroh · · Score: 4, Interesting

      But it's happening again. The Wild West internet is gradually coming under the thumb of the Pompous Puritans. Facebook, Twitter and even Reddit are shutting down free speech bit by bit.

      What about the free speech rights of Facebook or Twitter or Reddit? As much as I despise at least one of those corporations, I have to concede that those corporations also have the right to free speech, namely the right to control what appears on their platform. It's their platform -- we're all just guests there. To put the free speech rights of the guests above the owners of those platforms is to rob them of their rights.

      I appreciate the argument, and the desire to have free speech. But one person's free speech cannot infringe on someone else's.

      --
      People who say "sheeple" have about as much sophistication as an AOL user, and in fact are probably actually AOL users.
    2. Re:1956 redux ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Was Reddit the last major bastion of Free Speech?

      Was reddit *ever* a bastion of free speech? The karma system they invented algorithmically represses and censors users who don't conform to the groupthink more efficiently than an army of ironfisted moderators ever could.

      4chan is about the last major site left with pure(ish) free speech (modulo the occasional vindictive mod). Also worth pointing out that /pol/ is more active than all political subreddits combined on a posts per hour basis.

    3. Re:1956 redux ? by labnet · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The Wild West internet is gradually coming under the thumb of the Pompous Puritans

      Except these 'Pomous Puritans' are now from the hard left instead of the religious right.

      --
      46137
  9. An absolute crock by tannhaus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Guns are not illegal. The purchases on gundeals were all above board NFA licensed businesses that required NFA transfers that included background checks. So, there was no illegal activity going on there. What's next? They ban communities where people hookup because some people consider it immoral? So posting pictures of your genitalia is ok, but getting a good deal on a scope isn't?

  10. Re:The last few days have been strangely coordinat by sd4f · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's definitely trying to make the news cycle, and if there are any lessons to be learnt from gamergate, it's being orchestrated, and, I'm not surprised to see some of the same companies involved again.

    The rhyme of history is sounding again. When the printing press was invented in Europe, it didn't take long for establishments to see that sharing information was not always in their interests, books got banned, notably political ones. I think we're just in a similar phase as then; some companies are taking it on themselves to consolidate and control what gets shared.

  11. Non political my ass by Snotnose · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Just like Google, err,, cough cough utube cough, you are clearly showing your political bias.

    Doesn't matter if you are for or against gun control, you can't deny utube and reddit are left wing.

    / don't own any guns
    // never bought a GF an abortion
    /// I must be a D

    1. Re:Non political my ass by edtice1559 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      The reality is that our world is bifurcating. That's happening for a number of reasons. An obvious one is the "hollowing out" of the middle class. But there's certainly more to it than that. In the 1980s or so, when religion was still very influential various Christian groups discovered the power of the boycott and other non-religious economic activities to push a social agenda onto non-believers. I have no idea why they would do this. If you force an atheist to keep his business closed on Sunday morning does that help him get to heaven? Does it help you? I've actually read the Christian bible and didn't see support for this anywhere

      Christianity perfected these techniques but didn't invest anything in marketing in order to update it's business model and messaging for modern times and, as a result, lost much of it's influence. However those techniques are now being wielded by those with a progressive agenda many of whom were probably one-time church members.

      Companies see the writing on the wall and it very well may be the case that, at some point, stores have to have (D) and (R) after them just like our elected officials. This forces them to look forward and figure out which views the majority will hold and engage in virtue signaling in this area.

      This is a terrible outcome because it means that it will become much harder to challenge majority views. I think it's a shame, but it's unavoidable. The clocks aren't going to turn back so life is always going to be somewhat progressive. But we need strong conservative voices to ensure that policy doesn't get ahead of the data or ignore critical facts (like not being able to borrow infinite amounts of money.) Unfortunately, the only "conservative" voices we have in the US are always making impossible promises to turn back the clock rather than trying to argue for smoother transitions.

  12. Re:Meh, meh, meh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Voat is contaminated by the racist fuckheads who went there after Reddit purged them. Now any self-respecting person who goes there comes back looking for the clear history button in their browsers.

    Better to let that one be and find another alternative instead.

  13. It's their right to not be enablers by ichifish · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Seems like knowing that you've enabled a murder, an overdose, or a rape might keep you up at night. Maybe Reddit just doesn't want to be a part of it. It's a big old internet. Users that want to sell guns and drugs and sex can go somewhere else.

  14. Re: The last few days have been strangely coordina by bestweasel · · Score: 2

    Is it a response to this, passed by the Senate 2 days ago?

    What happened instead is the FOSTA-SESTA package, in which House lawmakers have incorporated the worst provisions of both bills in ways aimed at making internet companies more subject to prosecution and lawsuits and more prone to censor users' speech online.

    According to the EFF:

    SESTA/FOSTA will silence online speech by forcing Internet platforms to censor their users.

  15. Re:The last few days have been strangely coordinat by GrumpySteen · · Score: 3, Funny

    You figured it out. It's those damned bow and arrow makers who are behind the conspiracy to get guns banned in order to drive up their sales!

  16. Loophole by manu0601 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    As of today, users may not use Reddit to solicit or facilitate any transaction or gift involving certain goods and services, including: firearms, ammunition, or explosives; drugs, including alcohol and tobacco, or any controlled substances (except advertisements placed in accordance with our advertising policy); paid services involving physical sexual contact; stolen goods; personal information; falsified official documents or currency

    If I read correctly, one can still trade chemical weapons. Elephant's tusks seems fine. Human organs trafficking seems to be in a grey zone because of physical contact.

  17. Re: "Reddit has been something of a Wild West..." by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Alas, given that some people consider the Second Amendment to be "crazy and offensive", it's pretty much impossible to avoid the label.

    The "Crazy and Offensive" comes when supporters of the second amendment consider the deaths of children to be a reasonable price to pay for the right of crazies to buy assault weapons. In most people's world, there's no way that's not 'crazy and offensive.'

  18. Re:The last few days have been strangely coordinat by tlhIngan · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think the problem is, the government is letting shootings slide. I mean, earlier this week was another one, much smaller but still, it happened.

    When there was a democrat in the house, he could say grand things, knowing that Congress would never approve it. But at least He Was Doing Something About It. He managed to work both sides quite well - make the big evil Republicans the reason he can't pass anything, and at the same time, gun owners were nervous, so every time they'd buy more guns, simulating the economy more.

    Now that the entire government is republican controlled, there is no more excuse. Trump can't say he can't do anything about it because Congress won't let him, and everyone knows he loves his executive orders and he's famous for his Get Things Done attitude.

    Problem is, he didn't. He made some noise about it, and let it peter it. Then it happened again. And people are at their breaking point. Businesses see that, they realize that it isn't business as usual and they need to Do Something to appeal to the silent majority who do want some form of dun control. (I believe the stats have it around 75% or more. It seems less, but the NRA has a whole pile of money they spend buying politicians and in fact, if one wavers in their support, all that money suddenly goes to their opponent.

    The political climate has shifted, and businesses are simply stepping into the vacuum, realizing that while the NRA business is nice, it's not actually necessary, and they get a nice PR boost from being seen as Doing Something.

    As long as mass shootings keep continuing to happen (and there's no indication it's going to stop), this is going to get worse. As long as the guy in the White House does everything else other than be seen doing something about the issue, companies are going to reconsider their support. The irony is, the NRA may have one the battle (Trump does nothing), but they might lose the war (popular opinion turns against gun owners, even being brandished as idiots of a barbaric age).

    As long as kids are dying in the streets, no amount of tariffs or trade wars matter.

  19. Re: The last few days have been strangely coordina by Reverend+Green · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Disarm the common people! Down with freedom and democracy! The Social Justice reich shall last a thousand years!

  20. Reddit by Reverend+Green · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Reddit - come for the bigoted elitists lecturing everyone about their moral superiority - stay for the censorship!

  21. Re: The last few days have been strangely coordina by pots · · Score: 2

    Yes, probably. That bill is specifically about prostitution, but it mandates review and censorship of user-submitted content. So since these companies are implementing those processes anyway, they're likely trying to fend off further regulation by getting ahead of the censorship curve.

    The fact that they're targeting guns isn't really surprising, that most recent Florida shooting is still a pretty hot topic.

  22. FOSTA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Before all the alt-right Nazis go blaming liberal companies blah blah blah - someone should mention the Republican Congress passage of FOSTA. The bill makes it so that website owners can be held liable for posts of their users. Right now it is supposed to specifically target sex trafficking but broad language in the bill and the likelihood of increasing liability is making a lot of companies panic.

  23. Re:The last few days have been strangely coordinat by Kokuyo · · Score: 2

    No, they probably have the same percentage of shitty individuals as any other loosely grouped mass of people.

    If you look into a subculture long enough, you'll always be able to collect a shitton of asshattery, especially if you're not constrained by such thungs as context.

    Fake news everywhere ;).

  24. Re:The last few days have been strangely coordinat by goose-incarnated · · Score: 3

    This is as close to a literal marketplace of ideas as we will ever get. The majority favour more gun controls now,

    The vocal minority do. As we've seen in all recent elections, your point of view is shared by a minority of the population.

    --
    I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
  25. Re:The last few days have been strangely coordinat by goose-incarnated · · Score: 3, Informative

    Businesses see that, they realize that it isn't business as usual and they need to Do Something to appeal to the silent majority who do want some form of dun control. (I believe the stats have it around 75% or more.

    The stats of those who want stricter gun control are around 10%. The 75% number are those who want "some" form of gun control and who were told that there are none at the moment. The 75% are quite happy with the existing gun-controls, only they don't know it is existing.

    --
    I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
  26. Likely caused by FOSTA by merlinokos · · Score: 2

    This appears to probably have been caused by FOSTA, which Congress recently passed. That's why it appears that many sites are coordinating these changes - the government is forcing them to by holding websites responsible for users undertaking illegal activities. More details can be found here:
    https://boingboing.net/2018/03/22/craigslist-personals-shut-down.html
    with some additional links to the Reddit announcement, and an EFF announcement of how Congress is censoring the internet.

  27. Re:The last few days have been strangely coordinat by argStyopa · · Score: 2

    "As long as kids are dying in the streets, no amount of tariffs or trade wars matter."

    Except...it's not that bad, and getting better.
    1) violent crime is continuing a decades-long trend of decrease
    2) gun homicides have dropped by 1/3 (!) since a high in the early 1990s, from 18000 to about 13000.
    3) https://news.northeastern.edu/... shows that school shootings are down 75-80% in that same span.

    By *any* objective measure, gun violence is decreasing significantly. We should be celebrating.wildly at the improvement.

    (It's worth noting that both of these numbers have decreased simultaneous with the largest increases in private gun ownership in US history. I'm not asserting causality - I believe the violent crime decline is probably due more to easily available abortions - but certainly it disproves the superficial point that guns cause violence.)

    (And as far as your "it's all Republicans, they have no excuse"...erm, they couldn't kill Obamacare despite basically running solely and universally on that platform for the last what, 6 years? I don't think you get how government works.)

    --
    -Styopa
  28. Re:The last few days have been strangely coordinat by CanHasDIY · · Score: 2

    ...but the NRA has a whole pile of money they spend buying politicians and in fact, if one wavers in their support, all that money suddenly goes to their opponent.

    It seems that way, because you're basing that opinion on your pre-existing beliefs and not facts.

    Here's a list of the top 50 organizational donors to US political campaigns - guess who didn't make it?

    Here's another list of the top 50 organizational donors to all federal contributions, not just campaigns - guess who's still not on the list?

    Here's a list of the top 75 corporate sponsors of legislation - again, the NRA is nowhere to be found.

    You have a choice here - learn that you were incorrect, accept it, and correct yourself, or double-down on the ignorance. Your call, but I know which decision I'd make.

    --
    An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese