Reddit CEO: "We stand for free speech... we are not going to ban distasteful subreddits." - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Moustacheman;38082453]Freedom of Speech might allow it, but if you do it in public, it's just fuckin' crude. And what these guys are saying is that we should be allowed to let men stalk women, take pictures of them, and share them with other fucking creeps. That's Invasion of Privacy, if I'm correct.[/QUOTE] well you know what they say freedom of speech does not mean freedom from response

[QUOTE=Protocol7;38077236]it's an irrelevant difference that's nothing more than a technicality the point being the idea behind "it's not illegal therefore it shouldn't be banned" is fucking ridiculous because creepshots and jailbait is still entirely harmful to the unwilling parties involved.[/QUOTE] Creepshots maybe, but Jailbait is different since most of that tends to be self-shots where a number of the shots were uploaded by the girls in the pictures them selves.

I've had this idea of making the subredit called, Shitting on highways. Just to see if people will start taking shits on the side of the road.

[quote]Why I felt OK outing Violentacrez: Anonymity should be valued mainly to the extent it helps protect powerless from powerful. VA wasn't that.[/quote] From Adrien Chen's Twitter

[QUOTE=Squeaken;38082915]From Adrien Chen's Twitter[/QUOTE] That seems like a fair point in this case

oh he better nip off for a spot of tea before five bong hits! queen forbid

Just like I posted in the larger thread about reddit. A lot of admins are threatening to go full retard because of this identification of one of them and going to stop moderating suddenly to prove that without them 'reddit would be much worse'. [url]http://i.imgur.com/mU5um.png[/url]

[QUOTE=Mindtwistah;38081529]How is it not harmless? I'm not saying it's victimless since there is definitely a victim, but they are completely anonymous and will probably never know a photo of them is on reddit for wankcircles, it doesn't really harm anyone, it's just one step above thinking about some woman while fapping. I don't actually watch creepshots and whatnot but I don't see how its harming anyone either. You have to understand that your morals aren't universal truth, they are just morals and are not always entirely logical, and they always change throughought history.[/QUOTE] how are they not harmless? I don't know, now women have to worry about that weird ass fat neckbeard snapping a photo of their ass on the train the "well they don't know" argument is [I]terrible[/I] - there is no end to the things you can do without someone knowing, and it doesn't make it a justifiable action if they don't know. it isn't physically harmful, no; it isn't emotionally harmful unless you find yourself on one of these websites; but no woman should ever have to find herself in a situation where her ass was uploaded to a website unknowingly. [QUOTE=catbarf;38081689]I may come across as a massive asshole for this, but how is it an invasion of privacy? I can understand the sexualization argument, but if you go out in public looking a particular way, I don't see how that appearance being documented is violating your privacy. American law at least has a clear precedent that you have a right to privacy in your home, but no general expectations of privacy out in public. I remember a lawsuit a few years ago where a couple who had sex on a hotel balcony were videotaped, and were suing to have the video taken off the Internet as an invasion of privacy. The court ruled that they were outdoors and in public, and so could not dictate the use of a video with them in it. Seems the same idea, pretty much.[/QUOTE] again, using the law as a basis for morality isn't really correct. it is not defined as an invasion of privacy in law, with this you are correct - but in my opinion having what is essentially softcore pornography taken of yourself unknowingly seems to me like it violates a personal right to, y'know, your own body. [editline]17th October 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Broseph_;38082735]Creepshots maybe, but Jailbait is different since most of that tends to be self-shots where a number of the shots were uploaded by the girls in the pictures them selves.[/QUOTE] in both cases neither subject desires to be the neckbeard jerk-off subject of the day

[QUOTE=GlebGuy;38075916]I don't think 'free-speech' counts for things that are perverse, disrespectful, stupid and just plain wrong.[/QUOTE] ~your rights end where my feelings begin~

[QUOTE=Corporal Yippie;38083362]"your rights end where my beliefs begin"[/QUOTE] there is a difference between limiting one's rights based on your beliefs and prohibiting socially destructive behavior.

[QUOTE=Swilly;38083173]Just like I posted in the larger thread about reddit. A lot of admins are threatening to go full retard because of this identification of one of them and going to stop moderating suddenly to prove that without them 'reddit would be much worse'. [url]http://i.imgur.com/mU5um.png[/url][/QUOTE] they should just leave if they think they're that important. congrats you know how to remove bad things i'm sure anyone not stupid could do that.

[QUOTE=Protocol7;38083288]again, using the law as a basis for morality isn't really correct. it is not defined as an invasion of privacy in law, with this you are correct - but in my opinion having what is essentially softcore pornography taken of yourself unknowingly seems to me like it violates a personal right to, y'know, your own body.[/QUOTE] Hmm. I don't know. I mean, I get what you're saying, and I tend to agree from a moral standpoint, but at the same time I don't see why someone who objects to their image being used one way (sexualization by creepy people) has more of a right to claim that their privacy was invaded than someone else objecting to their image being used another way (say, in a political piece). I think the issue here isn't an invasion of privacy, since nothing private is really being invaded by a public photograph, but rather just that it's morally wrong to be using random, unwilling strangers as fetish material.

[QUOTE=catbarf;38083577]Hmm. I don't know. I mean, I get what you're saying, and I tend to agree from a moral standpoint, but at the same time I don't see why someone who objects to their image being used one way (sexualization by creepy people) has more of a right to claim that their privacy was invaded than someone else objecting to their image being used another way (say, in a political piece). I think the issue here isn't an invasion of privacy, since nothing private is really being invaded by a public photograph, but rather just that it's morally wrong to be using random, unwilling strangers as fetish material.[/QUOTE] I guess that's true as well. There's really nothing you can do legally against creepshots though, what with phones getting better and better cameras. It'd be hard to tell.

[QUOTE=Falchion;38075922]Stop being a white knight, reddit is not making the right decisions here and the one thing FP atleast lacks is [I]free display [/I]of sexually deviant material.[/QUOTE] Correct me if my memory is wrong, but havn't we had chickens! penis posted in LMAO Pics/POY threads numerious times?.

[QUOTE=kenji;38083855]Correct me if my memory is wrong, but havn't we had chickens! penis posted in LMAO Pics/POY threads numerious times?.[/QUOTE] He also doesn't remember the, 'Weird shit that gets you hard thread' that quickly went downhill once we left the all the 15 to 17 year olds take over. In short, child porn. Our admin team shut that shit down as quickly as it came up and trying to revive it will get you banned and and thread locked.

[QUOTE=Swilly;38083874]He also doesn't remember the, 'Weird shit that gets you hard thread' that quickly went downhill once we left the all the 15 to 17 year olds take over. In short, child porn. Our admin team shut that shit down as quickly as it came up and trying to revive it will get you banned and and thread locked.[/QUOTE] The main reason why it was shut down is because the mods didnt want to go through pages of furry porn to find idiots posting cp. it sucks but what can you do.

[QUOTE=codemaster85;38083907]The main reason why it was shut down is because the mods didnt want to go through pages of furry porn to find idiots posting cp. it sucks but what can you do.[/QUOTE] That too. And I don't blame them for that :v:

What the fuck does free speech have to do with child porn? God dammit reddit gets more retarded by the day. How can they actually label themselves the front page of the internet. They are making the rest of it look bad.

[QUOTE=Jookia;38075832]Except that's bullshit because you have and still do ban r/lolicon.[/QUOTE] What self-contradicting fuck? I want to know their brilliant excuse for this.

Freedom of speech should not cover obvious criminal activities.

[QUOTE=Swilly;38083874]He also doesn't remember the, 'Weird shit that gets you hard thread' that quickly went downhill once we left the all the 15 to 17 year olds take over. In short, child porn. Our admin team shut that shit down as quickly as it came up and trying to revive it will get you banned and and thread locked.[/QUOTE] Literally one person posted his body and the mod team took two weeks to respond [editline]18th October 2012[/editline] And we never even learned if he was actually underage.

[QUOTE=Broseph_;38082735]Creepshots maybe, but Jailbait is different since most of that tends to be self-shots where a number of the shots were uploaded by the girls in the pictures them selves.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Protocol7;38083288] in both cases neither subject desires to be the neckbeard jerk-off subject of the day[/QUOTE] It depends. Sometimes they do upload it themselves on sites like reddit and 4chan for attention. But some of the self shots were done for the boyfriend who then leaked them. Sometimes they are from hacked photobuckets. You could say that since they were underage and not knowing what they were doing spreading this pictures is wrong. The main userbase (or big part of it) is in its teens itself so the spread of jailbait isn't that surprising since its natural to be interested in girls your age.

The beatingwomen subreddit is even worse than creepshots imo.

All the creepshots subreddits are banned now as well. I think the controversy is swaying their stance on "free speech".

The front page of the internet indeed. Pretty sad that reddit is used by so many entertainment businesses as a way of free marketing.

Reddit is one of the biggest communities on the net, and labeling it all based on the absolutely indefensible acts of a single subreddit is sensationalist and ignorant. From what I've experienced, it's a very small minority that believes that the subreddits in question, in this case r/jailbait and r/creepshots should be kept alive, because they are clearly illegal, immoral, and in conflict with the established rules of reddit. It really does hurt me a bit, when Facepunch, a community I've been apart of since early 2005, which itself has had a very, very turbulent past, decides to collectively hate on a community that is in many ways similar to itself, because of something that both communities actually agrees on. What's with the hate?

[QUOTE=Dr Magnusson;38086944]Reddit is one of the biggest communities on the net, and labeling it all based on the absolutely indefensible acts of a single subreddit is sensationalist and ignorant. From what I've experienced, it's a very small minority that believes that the subreddits in question, in this case r/jailbait and r/creepshots should be kept alive, because they are clearly illegal, immoral, and in conflict with the established rules of reddit. It really does hurt me a bit, when Facepunch, a community I've been apart of since early 2005, which itself has had a very, very turbulent past, decides to collectively hate on a community that is in many ways similar to itself, because of something that both communities actually agrees on. What's with the hate?[/QUOTE] If by very small minority you mean the people with the power to end shit like r/beatingwomen then yes I agree.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;38086961]If by very small minority you mean the people with the power to end shit like r/beatingwomen then yes I agree.[/QUOTE] I've never heard of this subreddit before today, and I can neither defend nor approve of their decision, because I don't know what really goes on in that subreddit. I don't know what their rules for content are. Either it is really a subreddit for posting unauthorized pictures of injured women, which is clearly wrong, or it's a just fetishist subreddit where pictures are posted with consent, in which case it would be legitimate. Whatever the case, that subreddit has only 34,000 subscribers, which makes it a really small subreddit (Even r/gamedev beats it by 5,000 subscribers), and does NOT represent all of Reddit!

[QUOTE=Mr. Smartass;38085100]Literally one person posted his body and the mod team took two weeks to respond [editline]18th October 2012[/editline] And we never even learned if he was actually underage.[/QUOTE] Wait seriously :v:

[QUOTE=trotskygrad;38075738]and in the massive reddit civil war the r/feminists shall rise up and crush the creepshots. hopefully :rolleyes:[/QUOTE] r/feminism is run by men's rights activists so I doubt that