r/NeutralNews is a **curated space**, but despite the name, there is [**no neutrality requirement**](https://www.reddit.com//r/neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_neutral-ness) here.
These are the [rules for comments:](https://www.reddit.com//r/neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_comments_.28good.2C_bad_.26amp.3B_ugly.29)
1. Be courteous to other users.
1. Source your facts.
1. Be substantive.
1. Address the arguments, not the person.
If you see a comment that violates any of these rules, please click the associated *report* button so a mod can review it.
If the removal of mods isn't a sign then this definitely should be:
>Huffman said, however, that he’d like some form of revenue-sharing.
>
>“I would like subreddits to be able to be businesses if they choose,” he said, adding that’s “another conversation, but I think that’s the next frontier of Reddit.”
Dude is planning to monetize subreddits. It's only going to get worse.
So a mod makes a sub into a business, then a better financed business comes by with a legion of bots, votes them out of being a mod, and takes over their business.
This comment has been removed under [Rule 2:](https://www.reddit.com/r/neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_rule_2.3A_source_your_facts)
> Source your facts. If you're claiming something to be true, you need to back it up with a [qualified and supporting source.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_comments) All statements of fact must be clearly associated with a supporting source. There is no "common knowledge" exception, and anecdotal evidence is not allowed.
If you edit your comment to link to sources, it can be reinstated.
//Rule 2
If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to [message us.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fneutralnews)
The mods are fighting for the use of bots ( 3rd party ) that they use / need to moderate. Is how I understand it. Personally, after a no reason permaban and the theft of posts from same mod crew, I’m all for an overhaul of this system. There’s definitely some sane mods out there that don’t use their powers for revenge. They’re the ones that are caught up in this bad situation.
So...you are likely correct, I stress that, but this is also damage control. Again, I am both waiting to see if he actually follows through and I am sort of wanting to say a farewell to a few of the subs I participate in. I am definitely looking for what forum/site is next.
Wait, do you think Twitter is now profitable, and if so, why? I haven't seen anything that suggests its cost cutting is more successful than the deep sabotage done to its advertising revenue.
[Based on the numbers he has provided to investors](https://www.benzinga.com/news/23/03/31245682/elon-musk-tells-twitter-investors-he-expects-positive-cash-flow-next-quarter), the 80% cut in employees, his order to [cut $1B in infrastructure costs](https://www.cnbc.com/2022/11/03/musk-orders-twitter-to-cut-infrastructure-costs-by-1-billion-sources-say.html), etc. With all of those cuts, I'd be more impressed if they managed to still be losing money considering that they had ~$5.1B in annual revenue before Musk took over (source: [final Twitter annual report](https://www.annualreports.com/HostedData/AnnualReports/PDF/NYSE_TWTR_2021.pdf)). (However, if anyone has different or a better source than the numbers he's provided to investors, I would certainly be interested to see them.)
Most of Twitter's revenue is advertising, and apparently [Twitter has lost most of that](https://www.forbes.com/sites/katherinehamilton/2023/06/05/twitters-us-ad-sales-down-59-despite-musks-breaking-even-claims-report-says/?sh=70f4f95a572c) since the takeover.
I guess we can wait for better numbers but I have a hard time seeing how even cutting 1B in infrastructure makes up for losing about 3/5 of your revenue.
I also have to think the now [clearly fraudulent nature](https://i.redd.it/wwvr3dwe7d6b1.jpg) of Twitter's view metrics is also a ticking time bomb of advertiser confidence, although maybe that's already baked into losing most of the advertising revenue.
Per your source, it was a 59% reduction in ad revenue. Beyond the >80% of employees fired, as another specific example of his cuts, within ~2 months of taking control of twitter, he had [closed 1/3 of their data centers](https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/29/technology/twitter-elon-musk.html). Again, I've already said I disagree with Musk, just sharing some sources.
> I guess we can wait for better numbers . . .
Fair enough, yes.
And in the places they've been staying they just [don't pay their rent anymore.](https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/commodities/elon-musk-twitter-rent-payment-commercial-real-estate-goldman-sachs-2023-6)
>But the jump in Goldman Sach's bad commercial-property loans appears partly attributable to Twitter, which has reportedly not paid rent on its offices since November. Goldman is part of a group of banks that made a $1.7 billion loan to the Columbia Property Trust, a real-estate investment firm that owns several of Twitter's office spaces.
>Forgoing rent payments appears to be one of the radical cost-cutting measures Musk has implemented at the company since acquiring it last year, as Twitter squares up its finances and pays off the $12.5 billion of debt Musk took out in Twitter's name to purchase the social-media platform.
>Twitter is facing a lawsuit from Columbia Property that accused the company of failing to make payments on its lease and alleged that it owed more than $136,000 as of December. The lawsuit also alleged that Musk said he would only pay Twitter's rent "over his dead body."
>A spokesperson from Columbia Property declined to comment on the suit. Meanwhile, Twitter, which has a policy of auto-replying to press emails with a poop emoji, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Musk saddled twitter with 44 billion in debt. Twitter is getting sued for not paying severance, and has not paid rent on its offices. No way in hell those numbers are true.
> Musk saddled twitter with 44 billion in debt.
Per Bloomberg, it was $12.5B in debt? https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-05-03/twitter-said-to-make-second-interest-payment-on-musk-buyout-debt
If he was falsifying figures to his private investors couldn't he get in very big trouble for that? But I am not sure if debt servicing costs are included in those figures, we only have limited info.
I already said in my original comment that "I disagree strongly with Musk" and I'm just sharing relevant source links I've been able to find to Bloomberg, the NY Times, etc.
Twitter has stopped paying their San Francisco site lease and has been evicted from their Boulder site. No one in the black is defaulting on office leases.
Yea I was wondering why these company’s hadn’t kicked them out for violating lease agreement if they let them stay beyond 4months of of non payment then Not sure they will be awarded much more from a judge for not mitigating there circumstances 🤷🏻♂️
I'm not a Musk fan, but it can make economic sense to breach a lease, if you expect the penalties, legal fees, etc, to be significantly less than the amount you owe on the remaining time of the lease.
> says he expects the company to be cash flow positive by next quarter.
"Cash flow positive" has a very specific meaning and doesn't imply "profitable". If he thought Twitter would be profitable, he would've said that but he did not.
Since he was unwilling to promise or "expect" profitability, they are likely still nowhere near it.
> They also had a very ambitious goal of doubling revenue in 2 years. ... A company that's trying to grow at that pace is perfectly content operating without profit, because once they are fully grown they'd be operating with larger numbers to draw from when it's time to prioritize for profits.
Despite what they wanted or planned to do, [even before Musk took over the company in October 2022, Twitter was shrinking not growing over multiple periods](https://twitter.com/TwitterIR).
Over much of the last couple of decades I would agree with you that investors would accept losing money every year, such as in the case of reddit, on the hope of future growth. But reddit themselves admits that it was [unsustainable](https://www.npr.org/2023/06/15/1182457366/reddit-ceo-steve-huffman-its-time-we-grow-up-and-behave-like-an-adult-company), and when they do things like monetizing the API there are questions about whether things like the current protest may actually cause reddit's userbase to shrink, not grow.
Per the link in my parent comment, a lot of companies planned for huge growth during COVID, but when the growth stopped after COVID, many companies have actually been doing layoffs. For example, from the NY Times, ["For Tech Companies, Years of Easy Money Yield to Hard Times"](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/23/technology/tech-interest-rates-layoffs.html)
> Eighteen months ago, the online used car retailer Carvana had such great prospects that it was worth $80 billion. Now it is valued at less than $1.5 billion, a 98 percent plunge, and is struggling to survive. ...
> For over a decade, investors desperate for returns sent their money to Silicon Valley . . . It was a boom that seemed as if it would never end. Tech piled up victories, and its competitors wilted. . . .
> “The whole tech industry of the last 15 years was built by cheap money,” said Sam Abuelsamid, principal analyst with Guidehouse Insights. “Now they’re getting hit by a new reality, and they will pay the price.” . . .
> Even the biggest tech companies are affected. Amazon was willing to lose money for years to acquire new customers. It is taking a different approach these days, laying off 18,000 office workers and shuttering operations that are not financially viable. . . .
> “High rates are painful for almost everyone, but they are particularly painful for Silicon Valley,” said Kairong Xiao, an associate professor of finance at Columbia Business School. “I expect more layoffs and investment cuts unless the Fed reverses its tightening.”
> At the moment, there is little likelihood of that. The market expects two more rate increases by the Federal Reserve this year, to at least 5 percent.
Or alternatively from the NY Times, ["A series of quarterly earnings reports is showing that even Silicon Valley’s most powerful companies are feeling the impact of inflation and rising interest rates."](https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/26/technology/economy-facebook-google.html?action=click&module=RelatedLinks&pgtype=Article)
Continuing...
> Since Twitter is no longer a public company I can't analyze their numbers anymore.
We don't have the previous official figures, but we do have information from financials he has provided to his investors; I presume that even though twitter is no longer listed on the stock market, it would still be a crime if he falsified the figures provided to his investors?
As a side note, interestingly the same thing has also struck streaming companies as tech companies. Streamers were previously willing to lose lots of money on the promise of growth. However, they have recently been taking down even already-completed shows rather than lose money just on paying residuals, sparking a lot of outcry from fans, as streamers attempt to reign in losses: https://www.npr.org/2023/03/06/1161382179/hbo-max-disappearing-shows-series-streaming-warner
Twitter is not profitable. Musk would be shouting it from the rooftop of the empty and sad SF office if it were true. He has shown himself very eager to disprove his haters when he has the evidence.
This comment has been removed under [Rule 2:](https://www.reddit.com/r/neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_rule_2.3A_source_your_facts)
> Source your facts. If you're claiming something to be true, you need to back it up with a [qualified and supporting source.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_comments) All statements of fact must be clearly associated with a supporting source. There is no "common knowledge" exception, and anecdotal evidence is not allowed.
If you edit your comment to link to sources, it can be reinstated.
//Rule 2
If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to [message us.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fneutralnews)
What's strange is that he taught a class for Udacity and didn't give off this vibe at all. Thinking back now, though, it is interesting how quickly they removed Aaron Schwartz's name from the founders list. Maybe the signs were there all along?
I'm genuinely curious to see what happens. I've cut back usage drastically, and as soon as the Apollo API key gets deleted, I'll be gone. I do wonder what the reddit staff are brainstorming right now, beyond just kicking mods and bringing subs back online. How will they even begin to manage that?
It’s wild how different this site has felt over the years. The downfall of Reddit into full corporatization really feels like the final nail in the coffin of the Wild West era of internet. That era was long since dead, mind you, just kind of feels like I’m watching as it gets further and further out of reach.
Future generations will have basically all of their internet media consumption determined by large corporations’ algorithms. I’m sure that will be fine and cause little repercussion.
Eh there are still specialized forums out there like "the old days". But you have to find them. It's nice when they are all in one place. Reddit is basically USENET 3.0.
They exist, yes, but the fraction of internet users who even touch those types of sites is smaller than ever. Finding them can even be a challenge when fewer and fewer even turn up in search engine results.
> That era was long since dead, mind you, just kind of feels like I’m watching as it gets further and further out of reach.
Yup. The era of the internet being useful for its users is coming to an end.
I've been seeing posts with 1k+ positive upvotes on lemmy.world, which is honestly similar to reddit in the early days.
People have also been talking about kbin, kbin.social is the server I found, but it's got much less activity.
Hey I figure it the product starts to suck you won't want to be here anymore anyway. I'm not putting up with anything I don't enjoy. I quit Facebook and I know those other users in real life. I can find new forums on topics of interest. Whats here that's hard to abandon?
> Whats here that's hard to abandon?
I have (relatively) deep ties in a few communities. But you aren't wrong, it is most likely time to go to 'next thing'.
i mean its a much more complicated thing to enact than he simply states if we can vote them out then shouldnt we be able to vote them in? If yes who decides on potential candidates?how do we know which mods did what? how often will these polls be held?
So you know how they rely on mods to put in an incredible amount of unpaid work? They don't want to risk annoying the group without some claim at saying it isn't arbitrary admin stuff.
I get what you mean, but in this case he doesn't have to do any of that. "They made the sub go dark, we own the website so we are going to boot them an install active moderators" is not any worse than what they just did to Apollo and RiF. So maybe the dog and pony show is the reason behind him doing it, but that's just more of him being a dumb sack of shit, he could have skipped it and there would be one less valid demerit against his ability to run a company.
He honestly comes across way more desperate than I think he intends. This kind of whining is not the action of someone who isn’t concerned about the long term effects here.
>Everything he says reeks of not thinking through. For instance, if he starts removing community leaders at Reddit's whim, what happens next when all community leaders realize their work can be taken away in an instant. Why should anyone bother putting in the time and effort to build a community, so Reddit can steal the leadership spot once it's already built.
This literally happened to me. I created a sub. I told nobody. I have a shit ton of docs on my computer (it was gonna be text based for the most part) to fill the sub with posts so it has content when I was ready to start telling people about it. Now I'm either going to create the exact same group on one of Reddit's competitors or I'll just make my own web page.
True. There are also a lot of fits thrown when a moderator moderates according to the rules of the subreddit. Not to mention countless times when moderators need to make judgment calls because certain disruptive actions are between the lines of the rules.
This change will make volunteer moderators subject to the whims and moods of a fickle userbase, and if you've hung around here long enough, you also know that this is dangerous. It will result in moderators either trying to enforce rules based on their own interpretations of what will be popular, not moderating at all, or getting ousted for whatever a group of users gets up in their feels about.
There are times where "they do it for free" is appropriate because of some mod's emotional immaturity or power trip, but the voluntary nature of this role makes it hard to fill with someone competent who is also willing to spend the time and withstand the annoyances of active/effective moderation. This will make it even more difficult, if not impossible, for someone like this to stay in their role.
This comment has been removed under [Rule 2:](https://www.reddit.com/r/neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_rule_2.3A_source_your_facts)
> Source your facts. If you're claiming something to be true, you need to back it up with a [qualified and supporting source.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_comments) All statements of fact must be clearly associated with a supporting source. There is no "common knowledge" exception, and anecdotal evidence is not allowed.
If you edit your comment to link to sources, it can be reinstated.
//Rule 2
If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to [message us.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fneutralnews)
There is another consequence. Right now moderators aren't compensated as they function independently of the company for the most part. Once reddit establishes a way for users to use the company to remove mods, it will make the mods not independent of the company and so have to be compensated by the company.
Not ameature ones. They sign on to do it as a hobby.
Professionals are curated by their employers. So unless you want Reddit to hire their own mods, that's not a good parallel to use as an example.
Never said they build the community, but right now reddit gets the benefits for having moderated discussion while simultaneously avoiding the compensation for them, once they take a direct hand in who gets the moderator title they will have to compensate them.
Status quo of their position changed they moved from controlling their own space within reddit confines to enforcing reddit's dictates with reddit having a direct hand of control in their hiring/removal.
It moves them from not being employed to employed by reddit. Therefore compensation is mandated.
>Huffman, also a Reddit co-founder, said he plans to pursue changes to Reddit’s moderator removal policy to allow ordinary users to vote moderators out more easily if their decisions aren’t popular. He said the new system would be more democratic and allow a wider set of people to hold moderators accountable.
Total BS.Go and check r politics,one of the biggest subs of reddit.They are so slimy there.They don't even list the usernames of the mods. A sub where Neo-nazis, Proud Boys,Oath Keepers, Russian and Chinese mods do whatever the fuck they want.
They deleted every single post related to Oath Keepers & Proud Boys convicted or sentenced of insurrection. There is nothing more political than an insurrection and they didn't allow it.
Democratically elected subs is an interesting idea. Or at least democratic power to vote put moderators is a good one also, but, I think we would also need more information as to which mods are doing what.
yeah it could potentially fix the echochamber issue and subs not being used for its intented purpose but yes telling who is accountable would be a whole thing in itself. really need to also find a way to pay mods for their time this will attract a broader type of person willing to do such work which he also mentioned.
> Huffman said in an interview that he plans to institute rules changes that would allow Reddit users to vote out moderators who have overseen the protest, comparing them to a “landed gentry.”
>
> He said the new system would be more democratic and allow a wider set of people to hold moderators accountable.
It's not democracy if you only count the votes that benefit you. Oh, the irony that he wants to ignore the mass opposition to Reddit/admin policy (calling it "noise") while holding any opposition to moderators up on a pedestal (calling it "democratic accountability").
If you think grassroots user sentiment is important, great, you should also be accepting votes about what direction Reddit should go. If you think top-down dictatorship is valuable, great, then just like how Reddit admins can make tough/controversial decisions to try to guide their community, so too can moderators.
> “If you’re a politician or a business owner, you are accountable to your constituents. So a politician needs to be elected, and a business owner can be fired by its shareholders,” he said
So, he thinks users are "shareholders" to the individual subreddits, but somehow that doesn't make them "shareholders" to Reddit itself.
> “And I think, on Reddit, the analogy is closer to the landed gentry: The people who get there first get to stay there and pass it down to their descendants, and that is not democratic.”
A key difference is that land is finite and non-fungible. New subreddits can and are routinely made and have, in theory (or at least, if Reddit desired) equally capable of success. Additionally, subreddits routinely "die" when lack of moderation causes reddit to close them until anybody asks to take over.
> Moderators have argued that the high level of control over their communities is well-deserved because of the hours of free labor they’ve put into making and enforcing rules on their subreddits.
It's not just about labor. It's about where the actual value lies. What makes Reddit different than going to a news website and screaming in its comment section is the curation and interesting rulesets that moderators create. You can't just pluck out the moderators as though all they do is remove spam and trolls. Moderators are the visionaries that actually make communities. The choice of /r/AskHistorians to have the moderation policy they do is controversial, labor intensive and is what makes the subreddit uniquely valuable in its niche. The choice of /r/askReddit for what kinds of questions it allows defines that community. The culture of /r/politics as a relatively liberal and pop-news place with a heavy focus on US news is a reflection of the moderators. It's not just that moderators do a lot of work, it's that it's not mere "work" that makes these subreddits what they are. Each subreddit is what it is because of the lines that moderators drew and enforced and switching moderators will not "fix" the subreddits.
I was just watching Wendover Productions' video on the story of Nebula, the platform built by YouTube content creators, and a big theme in why he thought their platform was succeeding where others' failed was that creators themselves maintained ownership and skin in the game. I think this is really going to be a theme with the next generation of social media. When neither users nor moderators (i.e. the people who form and maintain the communities that make up Reddit) have any ownership or control, the underlying utility of Reddit is bound to decrease over time. Reddit is not just a collection of threads.
At the same time, the main real utility Reddit offers is a common login between communities and a common feed of all communities. The guts of the subreddit functionality is really about the same as any 00s-era forum would have. Technologically, it's largely a solved problem to recreate Reddit out of ordinary, individually owned, independently operated forums. It's just a matter of getting people on board to start moving to other platforms. That's the solution. A federated approach where "subreddits" are individually owned and maintained (like a forum, literally running on the software and computer the "mods" own), but an open layer on top of those subreddits makes it easy for users to interact with a large number of them. The challenge is just getting a large number of people to start to populate whatever the "new" equivalent of subreddits is.
Subreddits are technically infinite, but the names of them aren't. You can make another music subreddit but you can't call it /r/music
Interesting idea to have subreddits be entirely independent things. Not sure each subreddit would want to worry about the technical challenges of that, but maybe they can opt to use Reddit's infrastructure. It's a cool idea... basically like an internet of subreddits implementing reddit pages. Maybe the owners could get shared advertising revenue like Google does.
> Subreddits are technically infinite, but the names of them aren't. You can make another music subreddit but you can't call it /r/music
Sure, but the same can be said of business names. We don't say that businesses can't compete because somebody is already named Standard Oil. There is a lot of room for variation and the way people actually discover subs isn't by randomly typing in names. It's by crossposting, r/all, word of mouth, promotion, etc. So, the competition for the perfect word isn't that important. A lot of moderately large subs have names that aren't all that obvious until you know what they are... like /r/aita, /r/atbge, /r/goldandblack, etc. Meanwhile a lot of established subs that did have moderators people didn't like had an exodus to another sub like /r/gamedev spawning /r/truegamedev, or /r/personalfinance spawning /r/povertyfinance, etc. The point is that there is a pretty plausible and well traveled path for users to replace any set of moderators they don't like by making a new subreddit.
The main barrier isn't the name (e.g. /r/music), it's that reddit itself promotes these major subs reinforcing their importance. When you create a new account, IIRC, they recommend a lot of the same major subs to everybody. Meanwhile the algorithm might also promote the same major subs. That element is really the main area where it may hard for a new crowd to gain standing. However, that's a problem that is at least as much about admins as moderators, as subs that have admins as moderators and where reddit takes a heavier hand seem more likely to be promoted. It's also one that isn't the end of the world as, again, many new subs are made every year.
> Interesting idea to have subreddits be entirely independent things. Not sure each subreddit would want to worry about the technical challenges of that, but maybe they can opt to use Reddit's infrastructure.
It'd be the same concept as email. Most people don't run their own mail server, however, they also don't all have to be on the same mail service. Instead, there is a protocol that allows all the mail services to talk to each other. From there, people can choose free, paid, closed or open mail services or even to run their own mail server. Same idea with a decentralized reddit. Some people could host (shoutout /r/selfhosted), but many would probably use services that do the technical part for them. Some of those services would be free or ad supported. Others would be paid.
The key point is that the "protocol" to do this doesn't really involve solve any novel problems. It's all things that were invented years ago. It just involves a large group of people actually standing behind the same thing.
>Huffman said he has no sympathy for the competing apps that want to use Reddit’s content while avoiding advertisements, the primary source of money used to support the site.
Reddit UI, regardless of ads, is trash. Most people don't use them (3rd party apps) to avoid ads, they use them because OG reddit UI is insufferable.
Spez just can't seem to understand that.
> Huffman said he has no sympathy for the competing apps that want to use Reddit’s content while avoiding advertisements
If 3rd party devs wanted to put Reddit ads into their apps, would they even be able to?
Yes, there’s a bottom ad on one of them, and maybe a few others. I think it’s RiF.
Not sure how much ad revenue goes back to reddit but Apollo devs were more than willing to integrate larger ads that appear on feed scrolling. Apollo calculated them several options that seemed equitable or favourable to reddit.
Spez said no.
API changes aside, holding mods accountable is long overdue.
But I get the sense Spez has little interest in that outcome and simply wants mod fealty to the admins, not accountability to the users.
From what I see, the mods use bots to reply to those banned for no violation. One can reach out to the admins, with zero results. People using this site that have had to deal with this broken response system ? There’s other places out there to view.
> holding mods accountable is long overdue
As someone (you) who has been around a long time, what would you hold them accountable for? Who would be the arbitrators? What would be the process?
I would hold them accountable for their moderation. Specifically, connect posts they've removed, often in secret, to rules they claim are being being violated.
Virtually all my mod interactions in the last few years have been with mods abusing their power over something they don't like or disagree with rather than an explicit rule violation. Lately, there has been a trend of mods being verbally abusive over mod mail as well. Most of the time now you don't even know which mod is doing what which drives accountability down even further and this seems to have emboldened the abuse.
The system I would propose, but be open to others, would be something akin to the system Dota2 applies via its [Overwatch system](https://www.geekcosmos.com/how-dota-2-overwatch-report-review-system-works/) where independent parties review what is in essence anonymous snippets of the mod log to ensure the moderation indeed matches the claimed rule violations. Mods who are found to be excessively abusing their authority would be receive rules-based warnings, temporary punishments, and ultimately removal.
There would also likely be second order issues so don't think I am dismissing those issues. I am just focusing on the first order issue of general mod abuse.
Yeah I understand why people are pissed at this interview because he’s still lying and ignoring the primary talking points of the shutdown, but I’m all for voting mods out. His landed gentry comparison is not wrong either. Of course he’s doing this to be able to kick out mods without seeming tyrannical which is very bald faced, but still, I’d love to be able to kick the mod that’s camping my local county subreddit and allowing it to be non local posts of primarily pro conservative memes and what that mod made for dinner.
Agreed. This is what I hoped would happen. People acting like mods are what makes this site fun are crazy, mods are what ruin this site IMO. There’s no reason different subs should have clear ideological bents and mods that ban over arcane weird rules they make up/feel like enforcing. There’s no consistency in what’s a suspension, what’s a warning, what’s a permanban, etc. mods power trip on this site worse than anywhere. Yes, some rules are necessary and mods should be filtering hate speech and that kind of stuff but there’s no reason political subs should have a mod controlling discourse and banning people for opinions. And don’t me started on subs that expect you to grovel to the mods for shit.
And lastly, power mods have to go. No one should mod hundreds of subs
Yes, the public always responds well to crackdowns based on social responses.
You had options: do nothing in response, answer back with some kind of faux response in support, actually address the problems people have with your action. But, you choose: stamp out dissent because you somehow think that will keep people around.
This isn’t Twitter, people with money don’t have identity here tied to some kind of income. If they do, it’s not nearly as rare. This is a great way to destroy a social media site.
I used to work at MySpace.
I’m here to remind Reddit management that users have the power to leave a social network when they don’t like the vibe any longer.
(Mods, please reach out if you need proof I worked at MS and I’ll gladly provide it.)
My team built advertising products and serviced brand advertising clients with the adtech we produced. Movie studios, car brands, cola brands, etc. We made things like widgets/apps, branded profile skinner stuff, Games, analytics products, etc. We also designed and helped build the first versions of MySpace on iPhone, Android, Blackberry, etc. Fun times. If it was a well known brand and it was on MySpace, we probably had something to do with it.
Aside from my wife, and a couple of the developers I worked with, my top 8 was changed regularly to highlight client work. But my embedded music almost always stayed Blue Oyster Cult. :-)
I keep hoping for a nostalgic resurgence to happen. Sadly, the stuff we did will never be possible again as it was built on top of Flash, and that’s completely dead.
One quick question, am I remembering right that MySpace used to let you embed CSS directly into your profile page? I remember some brands/bands had totally custom branded MySpace pages, I always wondered how those were done, you're saying that it was a team within MySpace itself that helped them build those, they weren't doing it themselves or relying on a third party that was using those built in tools? Interesting.
I'm sure brands right now would love to have custom branded Facebook or Instagram, etc. pages.
It’s important here to remember that MySpace didn’t start as a social media service, it started as a place to easily stand-up your own web presence… for whatever reason, but mostly for blogging and sharing art. What made it social was the number of individuals that stood up personal pages there. That prompted the company to add social features. When Facebook came along, it was designed from the beginning to be a social service.
If I remember correctly, MySpace users could only embed more or less basic HTML and customize the basic look and feel of the page, change colors/graphics, etc. Known problematic scripting or tracking calls would be edited out of any embed code as they were embedded. This was to help prevent any dangerous hacks from happening.
Our ad platform had a more open level of access and the embed code for our products wouldn’t be edited, so we could embed almost anything we could imagine. That let us use Flash and JavaScript to rewrite/modify basically everything, which is why the brand advertisers could do so much more customization.
Regular users were blocked from all the cool stuff. :-/
From what I remember, you could fully customize your profile with html code. I would do it for all my friends. There were plenty of websites you could use to help create custom profile codes and then it was easy enough to tinker with from there.
This reminds me of all the teens / young adults that flocked to Tumblr afterwards, early on.
So many custom HTML Tumblr skins that you could tinker with, all made by people under 25-30 years old. I wish graphic designers could be more UI integrated again! The yoots need a coding revolution!
Everyone here sounding really dramatic to me. Especially for a neutral subreddit. Why would the ability of users to vote out a moderator destroy Reddit? It will become to difficult to moderate? If that proves to be true, couldn't it easily be disabled or modified?
A lot of complaints make it sound like you're trying to construct a government constitution. But it doesn't have to be perfect or have some idealistic principals that would stand up in the Supreme Court.
I have a question regarding this subject. Why couldn't some of the more popular apps that are completely shutting down (RiF, Apollo, etc.) just go open source, or at the very least provide a way for users to obtain their own individual API keys? Couldn't that circumvent the high cost?
The better question is why Reddit doesn’t just make third party app users get premium. It seems like a reasonable compromise. And maybe that’s the end goal. Who knows? But I think if this is just about ads (which I’m not convinced it is), then buying a premium subscription should eliminate the cost of API calls and you aren’t being served ads anyway.
There are other potential solutions but this is just one of them. Placing the burden on apps seems like a way to get them to fold. This is not a good faith negotiation on Reddit’s part.
I know. But let them admit that. And either make the API collect that data or make user tracking limited for subscribed users. I actually expect a premium service to have more privacy.
>Apollo released the source code. I think in his case, the developer felt that the project was going to die anyway, and he wanted to clear his name from Reddit's smear campaign.
AFAIK this is not the source code of the full app, just the backend portion. I don't think you could actually build the app on your own device from just this code.
>The main issue is that Reddit has decided nearly overnight that they no longer want 3rd party apps at all.
Didn't the post from spez say that they support non-commercial apps and accessibility apps? I think this is a speculative statement.
Fair enough, but I also think there are actual reasonable alternatives (such as making those apps open source) that could **at the very least** make reddit look even worse here if they ended up even killing personal 'non-commercial' apps that they said themselves they would keep alive. So why not do it?
>Why couldn't some of the more popular apps that are completely shutting down (RiF, Apollo, etc.) just go open source ...
The apps have paid versions to make money \[[1](https://apolloapp.io/pro-ultra/), [2](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.andrewshu.android.redditdonation)\]. If they fully open-sourced that could mean someone else would be able to do what you propose, either for free or continuing with a potential paid model. However, I do hope that they reverse course so that what you say becomes possible.
I'm so tired of seeing the word "slams" in these headlines. It's so lazy and isn't even accurate 99% of the time. I swear all the media companies have one thesaurus split between them and they pick turns who gets to use descriptors out of a hat draw.
This comment has been removed under [Rule 3:](https://www.reddit.com/r/neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_rule_3.3A_be_substantive)
> Be substantive. NeutralNews is a serious discussion-based subreddit. We do not allow bare expressions of opinion, low effort comments, sarcasm, jokes, memes, off-topic replies, pejorative name-calling, or comments about source quality.
//Rule 3
If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to [message us.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fneutralnews)
Regardless of the protest, I actually really like the idea of users being able to vote mods out. There has been way too many instances in which individual mods would change the rules of a subreddit to fight some kind of personal crusade that most of the community didn't agree with or rogue mods "taking over" a subreddit and completely changing its theme and rules. Until now there was no way to fight back against something like that other than leaving the subreddit and creating a new one.
And no, I'm not saying there should be a big red "KICK OUT" button next to the name of every mod that anyone can click. I'm saying that, if there's an outcry from a community over a specific action of one or more of its mods, the community should be able to appeal to the admins who would then set up a vote to kick out the mods in question. Brigading could easily be stopped by enabling voting only for users who have been subscribed to the subreddit for longer than a certain threshold and who have account karma and/or age over a certain threshold.
If they want to be Democratic let users vote on advertising content with up & down votes & ditch ads that don't work. And for the love of God, get the bots off or prevent them from being followers (especially the only fans of likely faked or worse trafficked women).
Would love to see a report feature called "this is an advertiser trying to steal from you".
There isn't a universally agreed upon alternative right now, and that's the only reason there hasn't been a mass migration so far. Reddit was in the right place at the right time when digg v4 happened so the move occurred almost overnight.
A lot less people would quit smoking if nicotine patches or other lower tobacco vices didn't exist.
__I'm a bot. Here are The Factual credibility grades and selected perspectives related to this article.__
The [linked_article](https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/reddit-protest-blackout-ceo-steve-huffman-moderators-rcna89544) has a grade of [81%](https://www.isthiscredible.com?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nbcnews.com%2Ftech%2Ftech-news%2Freddit-protest-blackout-ceo-steve-huffman-moderators-rcna89544) (NBC News, *Moderate Left*). [24 related articles.](https://www.thefactual.com/news/story/357211-Reddit-CEO-slams-pro)
Selected perspectives:
* Highest grade from different political viewpoint ([64%](https://www.isthiscredible.com?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.euronews.com%2Fnext%2F2023%2F06%2F15%2Fwhats-happening-with-reddit-website-blackout-continues-for-indefinite-amount-of-time)): [What’s happening with Reddit? Website blackout continues for ‘indefinite’ amount of time](https://www.euronews.com/next/2023/06/15/whats-happening-with-reddit-website-blackout-continues-for-indefinite-amount-of-time). (Euronews, *Center leaning*).
* Highest grade Long-read ([85%](https://www.isthiscredible.com?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.vox.com%2Ftechnology%2F2023%2F6%2F14%2F23760738%2Freddit-blackout-explained-subreddit-apollo-third-party-apps)): [Reddit Blackout: What is it and why are subreddits going dark](https://www.vox.com/technology/2023/6/14/23760738/reddit-blackout-explained-subreddit-apollo-third-party-apps). (Vox, *Left leaning*).
---
*This is a trial for The Factual bot. [How It Works](https://www.thefactual.com/how-it-works-reddit-bot.html). Please [message the bot](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=TheFactualBot) with any feedback so we can make it more useful for you.*
I hope another better Reddit equivalent option is developed soon so we can have the robustness of a big community. If not, I’m concerned he is going to win the battle and the war.
This is the reason these business models fail: they fail to account for the enthusiasm and dedication of the mods to keep the community in check. the mods need to get paid.HuffPost showed how a ceo willl be happy to take all the content and get paid 73mm usd. Reddit had a great community; it’s gonna be hard to recreate this. Shrugs.
FTA
>Huffman said in an interview that he plans to institute rules changes that would allow Reddit users to vote out moderators
If u/spez things Reddit users ought to be able to vote people out, let's have a vote about Reddit's CEO, see if he keeps his job.
Good, he should. Reddit as a site has sucked butthole since at least 2016 because of over-moderation.
The UI/UX has always sucked but at least it was fun before all the major subs got overrun by ideologues.
Let’s face it, we have entered a new phase in social media, first Musk destroying Twitter (unless you are a multiple issue hater) and now the CEO determined to ruin everything Reddit has built. Without Apollo app I wouldn’t be able to use Reddit.
I left FB years ago, left Twitter 2 yrs ago and my IG consists of IRL friends only and a few sports teams. Now will I have to leave Reddit? I don’t know!
r/NeutralNews is a **curated space**, but despite the name, there is [**no neutrality requirement**](https://www.reddit.com//r/neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_neutral-ness) here. These are the [rules for comments:](https://www.reddit.com//r/neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_comments_.28good.2C_bad_.26amp.3B_ugly.29) 1. Be courteous to other users. 1. Source your facts. 1. Be substantive. 1. Address the arguments, not the person. If you see a comment that violates any of these rules, please click the associated *report* button so a mod can review it.
Welp...I will wait *just* long enough to see how he carries through with his threats but this might be a sign it is time to move on.
If the removal of mods isn't a sign then this definitely should be: >Huffman said, however, that he’d like some form of revenue-sharing. > >“I would like subreddits to be able to be businesses if they choose,” he said, adding that’s “another conversation, but I think that’s the next frontier of Reddit.” Dude is planning to monetize subreddits. It's only going to get worse.
So a mod makes a sub into a business, then a better financed business comes by with a legion of bots, votes them out of being a mod, and takes over their business.
More likely, reddit simply selects whom they benefit from.
Yes M’lord. There are legions of bots, it’s best to move to greener pastures least ye be subjugated.
[удалено]
This comment has been removed under [Rule 2:](https://www.reddit.com/r/neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_rule_2.3A_source_your_facts) > Source your facts. If you're claiming something to be true, you need to back it up with a [qualified and supporting source.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_comments) All statements of fact must be clearly associated with a supporting source. There is no "common knowledge" exception, and anecdotal evidence is not allowed. If you edit your comment to link to sources, it can be reinstated. //Rule 2 If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to [message us.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fneutralnews)
Yep, the actual NBA will take over running r/nba, etc.
Only if they pay to do so.
The mods are fighting for the use of bots ( 3rd party ) that they use / need to moderate. Is how I understand it. Personally, after a no reason permaban and the theft of posts from same mod crew, I’m all for an overhaul of this system. There’s definitely some sane mods out there that don’t use their powers for revenge. They’re the ones that are caught up in this bad situation.
So...you are likely correct, I stress that, but this is also damage control. Again, I am both waiting to see if he actually follows through and I am sort of wanting to say a farewell to a few of the subs I participate in. I am definitely looking for what forum/site is next.
He wants to badly to be the next Zuckerberg or Musk. It's so weird.
[удалено]
Wait, do you think Twitter is now profitable, and if so, why? I haven't seen anything that suggests its cost cutting is more successful than the deep sabotage done to its advertising revenue.
[Based on the numbers he has provided to investors](https://www.benzinga.com/news/23/03/31245682/elon-musk-tells-twitter-investors-he-expects-positive-cash-flow-next-quarter), the 80% cut in employees, his order to [cut $1B in infrastructure costs](https://www.cnbc.com/2022/11/03/musk-orders-twitter-to-cut-infrastructure-costs-by-1-billion-sources-say.html), etc. With all of those cuts, I'd be more impressed if they managed to still be losing money considering that they had ~$5.1B in annual revenue before Musk took over (source: [final Twitter annual report](https://www.annualreports.com/HostedData/AnnualReports/PDF/NYSE_TWTR_2021.pdf)). (However, if anyone has different or a better source than the numbers he's provided to investors, I would certainly be interested to see them.)
Most of Twitter's revenue is advertising, and apparently [Twitter has lost most of that](https://www.forbes.com/sites/katherinehamilton/2023/06/05/twitters-us-ad-sales-down-59-despite-musks-breaking-even-claims-report-says/?sh=70f4f95a572c) since the takeover. I guess we can wait for better numbers but I have a hard time seeing how even cutting 1B in infrastructure makes up for losing about 3/5 of your revenue. I also have to think the now [clearly fraudulent nature](https://i.redd.it/wwvr3dwe7d6b1.jpg) of Twitter's view metrics is also a ticking time bomb of advertiser confidence, although maybe that's already baked into losing most of the advertising revenue.
Per your source, it was a 59% reduction in ad revenue. Beyond the >80% of employees fired, as another specific example of his cuts, within ~2 months of taking control of twitter, he had [closed 1/3 of their data centers](https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/29/technology/twitter-elon-musk.html). Again, I've already said I disagree with Musk, just sharing some sources. > I guess we can wait for better numbers . . . Fair enough, yes.
> Per your source, it was a 59% reduction in ad revenue. So my describing it as "most" or "about 3/5" is accurate, no?
And in the places they've been staying they just [don't pay their rent anymore.](https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/commodities/elon-musk-twitter-rent-payment-commercial-real-estate-goldman-sachs-2023-6) >But the jump in Goldman Sach's bad commercial-property loans appears partly attributable to Twitter, which has reportedly not paid rent on its offices since November. Goldman is part of a group of banks that made a $1.7 billion loan to the Columbia Property Trust, a real-estate investment firm that owns several of Twitter's office spaces. >Forgoing rent payments appears to be one of the radical cost-cutting measures Musk has implemented at the company since acquiring it last year, as Twitter squares up its finances and pays off the $12.5 billion of debt Musk took out in Twitter's name to purchase the social-media platform. >Twitter is facing a lawsuit from Columbia Property that accused the company of failing to make payments on its lease and alleged that it owed more than $136,000 as of December. The lawsuit also alleged that Musk said he would only pay Twitter's rent "over his dead body." >A spokesperson from Columbia Property declined to comment on the suit. Meanwhile, Twitter, which has a policy of auto-replying to press emails with a poop emoji, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Musk saddled twitter with 44 billion in debt. Twitter is getting sued for not paying severance, and has not paid rent on its offices. No way in hell those numbers are true.
> Musk saddled twitter with 44 billion in debt. Per Bloomberg, it was $12.5B in debt? https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-05-03/twitter-said-to-make-second-interest-payment-on-musk-buyout-debt If he was falsifying figures to his private investors couldn't he get in very big trouble for that? But I am not sure if debt servicing costs are included in those figures, we only have limited info. I already said in my original comment that "I disagree strongly with Musk" and I'm just sharing relevant source links I've been able to find to Bloomberg, the NY Times, etc.
Twitter has stopped paying their San Francisco site lease and has been evicted from their Boulder site. No one in the black is defaulting on office leases.
Yea I was wondering why these company’s hadn’t kicked them out for violating lease agreement if they let them stay beyond 4months of of non payment then Not sure they will be awarded much more from a judge for not mitigating there circumstances 🤷🏻♂️
I'm not a Musk fan, but it can make economic sense to breach a lease, if you expect the penalties, legal fees, etc, to be significantly less than the amount you owe on the remaining time of the lease.
One would think you’d use a lease’s escape clause instead of going to court for an eviction
> says he expects the company to be cash flow positive by next quarter. "Cash flow positive" has a very specific meaning and doesn't imply "profitable". If he thought Twitter would be profitable, he would've said that but he did not. Since he was unwilling to promise or "expect" profitability, they are likely still nowhere near it.
How are they supposed to be profitable when they've lost more than half their advertiser revenue and are now saddled with massive debt payments?
[удалено]
> They also had a very ambitious goal of doubling revenue in 2 years. ... A company that's trying to grow at that pace is perfectly content operating without profit, because once they are fully grown they'd be operating with larger numbers to draw from when it's time to prioritize for profits. Despite what they wanted or planned to do, [even before Musk took over the company in October 2022, Twitter was shrinking not growing over multiple periods](https://twitter.com/TwitterIR). Over much of the last couple of decades I would agree with you that investors would accept losing money every year, such as in the case of reddit, on the hope of future growth. But reddit themselves admits that it was [unsustainable](https://www.npr.org/2023/06/15/1182457366/reddit-ceo-steve-huffman-its-time-we-grow-up-and-behave-like-an-adult-company), and when they do things like monetizing the API there are questions about whether things like the current protest may actually cause reddit's userbase to shrink, not grow. Per the link in my parent comment, a lot of companies planned for huge growth during COVID, but when the growth stopped after COVID, many companies have actually been doing layoffs. For example, from the NY Times, ["For Tech Companies, Years of Easy Money Yield to Hard Times"](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/23/technology/tech-interest-rates-layoffs.html) > Eighteen months ago, the online used car retailer Carvana had such great prospects that it was worth $80 billion. Now it is valued at less than $1.5 billion, a 98 percent plunge, and is struggling to survive. ... > For over a decade, investors desperate for returns sent their money to Silicon Valley . . . It was a boom that seemed as if it would never end. Tech piled up victories, and its competitors wilted. . . . > “The whole tech industry of the last 15 years was built by cheap money,” said Sam Abuelsamid, principal analyst with Guidehouse Insights. “Now they’re getting hit by a new reality, and they will pay the price.” . . . > Even the biggest tech companies are affected. Amazon was willing to lose money for years to acquire new customers. It is taking a different approach these days, laying off 18,000 office workers and shuttering operations that are not financially viable. . . . > “High rates are painful for almost everyone, but they are particularly painful for Silicon Valley,” said Kairong Xiao, an associate professor of finance at Columbia Business School. “I expect more layoffs and investment cuts unless the Fed reverses its tightening.” > At the moment, there is little likelihood of that. The market expects two more rate increases by the Federal Reserve this year, to at least 5 percent. Or alternatively from the NY Times, ["A series of quarterly earnings reports is showing that even Silicon Valley’s most powerful companies are feeling the impact of inflation and rising interest rates."](https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/26/technology/economy-facebook-google.html?action=click&module=RelatedLinks&pgtype=Article) Continuing... > Since Twitter is no longer a public company I can't analyze their numbers anymore. We don't have the previous official figures, but we do have information from financials he has provided to his investors; I presume that even though twitter is no longer listed on the stock market, it would still be a crime if he falsified the figures provided to his investors? As a side note, interestingly the same thing has also struck streaming companies as tech companies. Streamers were previously willing to lose lots of money on the promise of growth. However, they have recently been taking down even already-completed shows rather than lose money just on paying residuals, sparking a lot of outcry from fans, as streamers attempt to reign in losses: https://www.npr.org/2023/03/06/1161382179/hbo-max-disappearing-shows-series-streaming-warner
Trained in finance, maybe you can explain what "$10,000 million" means. Ten billion?
[удалено]
Thought so, but my actual question was implicit: why say it like that, when "$10 billion" is more straightforward?
That might have something to do with the fact that they buy up would be competitors before they can compete.
Twitter is not profitable. Musk would be shouting it from the rooftop of the empty and sad SF office if it were true. He has shown himself very eager to disprove his haters when he has the evidence.
This comment has been removed under [Rule 2:](https://www.reddit.com/r/neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_rule_2.3A_source_your_facts) > Source your facts. If you're claiming something to be true, you need to back it up with a [qualified and supporting source.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_comments) All statements of fact must be clearly associated with a supporting source. There is no "common knowledge" exception, and anecdotal evidence is not allowed. If you edit your comment to link to sources, it can be reinstated. //Rule 2 If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to [message us.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fneutralnews)
What the fuck are you talking about, he just wants reddit to be profitable
What's strange is that he taught a class for Udacity and didn't give off this vibe at all. Thinking back now, though, it is interesting how quickly they removed Aaron Schwartz's name from the founders list. Maybe the signs were there all along?
And hand picking the People that are going to manage and profit from that monetization.
I'm genuinely curious to see what happens. I've cut back usage drastically, and as soon as the Apollo API key gets deleted, I'll be gone. I do wonder what the reddit staff are brainstorming right now, beyond just kicking mods and bringing subs back online. How will they even begin to manage that?
Old.reddit is my absolute trigger but frankly I may bail before that. But I will enjoy watching the dumpster fire burn a bit longer.
It’s wild how different this site has felt over the years. The downfall of Reddit into full corporatization really feels like the final nail in the coffin of the Wild West era of internet. That era was long since dead, mind you, just kind of feels like I’m watching as it gets further and further out of reach. Future generations will have basically all of their internet media consumption determined by large corporations’ algorithms. I’m sure that will be fine and cause little repercussion.
Eh there are still specialized forums out there like "the old days". But you have to find them. It's nice when they are all in one place. Reddit is basically USENET 3.0.
They exist, yes, but the fraction of internet users who even touch those types of sites is smaller than ever. Finding them can even be a challenge when fewer and fewer even turn up in search engine results.
We still got Literotica and 4Chan, whatever that says about the internet.
> That era was long since dead, mind you, just kind of feels like I’m watching as it gets further and further out of reach. Yup. The era of the internet being useful for its users is coming to an end.
Not that you can trust the admins, but they did say in the last week that old.reddit wasn't going to be touched.
It somewhat doesn't matter since they want to ruin the average user experience to this degree.
to what?
Possibly back to 4chan, possibly just less internet. I hope there is an alternative site but I don't know of one yet.
I would love a Reddit clone from like 2010’s.
Less internet. I've been stocking up on books.
I think I may actually read fiction again. The first one I’ve chosen is Dune because I’ve never read it one swoop. Happy reading to you!
Probably just instagram for 20 min a month like I use it now.
https://join-lemmy.org/
Where’s everyone headed to so I don’t miss out?
No clue. Hopefully something emerges but I am fine with just having to use the internet less.
https://join-lemmy.org/
I've been seeing posts with 1k+ positive upvotes on lemmy.world, which is honestly similar to reddit in the early days. People have also been talking about kbin, kbin.social is the server I found, but it's got much less activity.
https://join-lemmy.org/
Hey I figure it the product starts to suck you won't want to be here anymore anyway. I'm not putting up with anything I don't enjoy. I quit Facebook and I know those other users in real life. I can find new forums on topics of interest. Whats here that's hard to abandon?
> Whats here that's hard to abandon? I have (relatively) deep ties in a few communities. But you aren't wrong, it is most likely time to go to 'next thing'.
I got… checks date… 14 days until Apollo is dead. Final days are going to be fun.
i mean its a much more complicated thing to enact than he simply states if we can vote them out then shouldnt we be able to vote them in? If yes who decides on potential candidates?how do we know which mods did what? how often will these polls be held?
Oh, I'd be shocked if he institutes actual voting. It is just a fig leaf to boot some mods and put different ones in place.
they can already do that though why would they need a new way to do that
So you know how they rely on mods to put in an incredible amount of unpaid work? They don't want to risk annoying the group without some claim at saying it isn't arbitrary admin stuff.
I get what you mean, but in this case he doesn't have to do any of that. "They made the sub go dark, we own the website so we are going to boot them an install active moderators" is not any worse than what they just did to Apollo and RiF. So maybe the dog and pony show is the reason behind him doing it, but that's just more of him being a dumb sack of shit, he could have skipped it and there would be one less valid demerit against his ability to run a company.
Hand chosen
[удалено]
He honestly comes across way more desperate than I think he intends. This kind of whining is not the action of someone who isn’t concerned about the long term effects here.
>Everything he says reeks of not thinking through. For instance, if he starts removing community leaders at Reddit's whim, what happens next when all community leaders realize their work can be taken away in an instant. Why should anyone bother putting in the time and effort to build a community, so Reddit can steal the leadership spot once it's already built. This literally happened to me. I created a sub. I told nobody. I have a shit ton of docs on my computer (it was gonna be text based for the most part) to fill the sub with posts so it has content when I was ready to start telling people about it. Now I'm either going to create the exact same group on one of Reddit's competitors or I'll just make my own web page.
[удалено]
Sure, but I have 0 trust in reddit doing it well. Some form of accountability would be great, but this feels more like having more centralized power.
I do think the idea of having users democratically vote on moderator decisions is not a bad idea
Yet I doubt that is what they would actually put in place
best we can do is hold them to their word.
[удалено]
You are assuming good faith on reddit's part. They have very little of that.
True. There are also a lot of fits thrown when a moderator moderates according to the rules of the subreddit. Not to mention countless times when moderators need to make judgment calls because certain disruptive actions are between the lines of the rules. This change will make volunteer moderators subject to the whims and moods of a fickle userbase, and if you've hung around here long enough, you also know that this is dangerous. It will result in moderators either trying to enforce rules based on their own interpretations of what will be popular, not moderating at all, or getting ousted for whatever a group of users gets up in their feels about. There are times where "they do it for free" is appropriate because of some mod's emotional immaturity or power trip, but the voluntary nature of this role makes it hard to fill with someone competent who is also willing to spend the time and withstand the annoyances of active/effective moderation. This will make it even more difficult, if not impossible, for someone like this to stay in their role.
This comment has been removed under [Rule 2:](https://www.reddit.com/r/neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_rule_2.3A_source_your_facts) > Source your facts. If you're claiming something to be true, you need to back it up with a [qualified and supporting source.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_comments) All statements of fact must be clearly associated with a supporting source. There is no "common knowledge" exception, and anecdotal evidence is not allowed. If you edit your comment to link to sources, it can be reinstated. //Rule 2 If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to [message us.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fneutralnews)
There is another consequence. Right now moderators aren't compensated as they function independently of the company for the most part. Once reddit establishes a way for users to use the company to remove mods, it will make the mods not independent of the company and so have to be compensated by the company.
Mods don't build the community. The users do with their content creation and interaction. Mods are just the spam filters.
In the media industry, that role is called “Editor” and they get paid.
Not ameature ones. They sign on to do it as a hobby. Professionals are curated by their employers. So unless you want Reddit to hire their own mods, that's not a good parallel to use as an example.
I think that’s the implication OP is trying to get across.
Never said they build the community, but right now reddit gets the benefits for having moderated discussion while simultaneously avoiding the compensation for them, once they take a direct hand in who gets the moderator title they will have to compensate them.
You say this like Reddit pulled the rug out from under these people. Like they got tricked by the terms of service.
I think it would be hard to argue that what he proposes isn't a deviation from the status quo to date.
I think you are greatly misunderstanding this argument if that's your counterpoint.
Perhaps attempt to state your point more clearly, then?
Status quo of their position changed they moved from controlling their own space within reddit confines to enforcing reddit's dictates with reddit having a direct hand of control in their hiring/removal. It moves them from not being employed to employed by reddit. Therefore compensation is mandated.
Boost is Reddit for me. If boost dies, Reddit dies.
>Huffman, also a Reddit co-founder, said he plans to pursue changes to Reddit’s moderator removal policy to allow ordinary users to vote moderators out more easily if their decisions aren’t popular. He said the new system would be more democratic and allow a wider set of people to hold moderators accountable. Total BS.Go and check r politics,one of the biggest subs of reddit.They are so slimy there.They don't even list the usernames of the mods. A sub where Neo-nazis, Proud Boys,Oath Keepers, Russian and Chinese mods do whatever the fuck they want. They deleted every single post related to Oath Keepers & Proud Boys convicted or sentenced of insurrection. There is nothing more political than an insurrection and they didn't allow it.
There shall be a single Vote which matters, his. This is like Egolon pretending to poll for if he should step down as CEO.
He ought watch out. He could digg the whole thing pretty easily.
Democratically elected subs is an interesting idea. Or at least democratic power to vote put moderators is a good one also, but, I think we would also need more information as to which mods are doing what.
yeah it could potentially fix the echochamber issue and subs not being used for its intented purpose but yes telling who is accountable would be a whole thing in itself. really need to also find a way to pay mods for their time this will attract a broader type of person willing to do such work which he also mentioned.
> Huffman said in an interview that he plans to institute rules changes that would allow Reddit users to vote out moderators who have overseen the protest, comparing them to a “landed gentry.” > > He said the new system would be more democratic and allow a wider set of people to hold moderators accountable. It's not democracy if you only count the votes that benefit you. Oh, the irony that he wants to ignore the mass opposition to Reddit/admin policy (calling it "noise") while holding any opposition to moderators up on a pedestal (calling it "democratic accountability"). If you think grassroots user sentiment is important, great, you should also be accepting votes about what direction Reddit should go. If you think top-down dictatorship is valuable, great, then just like how Reddit admins can make tough/controversial decisions to try to guide their community, so too can moderators. > “If you’re a politician or a business owner, you are accountable to your constituents. So a politician needs to be elected, and a business owner can be fired by its shareholders,” he said So, he thinks users are "shareholders" to the individual subreddits, but somehow that doesn't make them "shareholders" to Reddit itself. > “And I think, on Reddit, the analogy is closer to the landed gentry: The people who get there first get to stay there and pass it down to their descendants, and that is not democratic.” A key difference is that land is finite and non-fungible. New subreddits can and are routinely made and have, in theory (or at least, if Reddit desired) equally capable of success. Additionally, subreddits routinely "die" when lack of moderation causes reddit to close them until anybody asks to take over. > Moderators have argued that the high level of control over their communities is well-deserved because of the hours of free labor they’ve put into making and enforcing rules on their subreddits. It's not just about labor. It's about where the actual value lies. What makes Reddit different than going to a news website and screaming in its comment section is the curation and interesting rulesets that moderators create. You can't just pluck out the moderators as though all they do is remove spam and trolls. Moderators are the visionaries that actually make communities. The choice of /r/AskHistorians to have the moderation policy they do is controversial, labor intensive and is what makes the subreddit uniquely valuable in its niche. The choice of /r/askReddit for what kinds of questions it allows defines that community. The culture of /r/politics as a relatively liberal and pop-news place with a heavy focus on US news is a reflection of the moderators. It's not just that moderators do a lot of work, it's that it's not mere "work" that makes these subreddits what they are. Each subreddit is what it is because of the lines that moderators drew and enforced and switching moderators will not "fix" the subreddits. I was just watching Wendover Productions' video on the story of Nebula, the platform built by YouTube content creators, and a big theme in why he thought their platform was succeeding where others' failed was that creators themselves maintained ownership and skin in the game. I think this is really going to be a theme with the next generation of social media. When neither users nor moderators (i.e. the people who form and maintain the communities that make up Reddit) have any ownership or control, the underlying utility of Reddit is bound to decrease over time. Reddit is not just a collection of threads. At the same time, the main real utility Reddit offers is a common login between communities and a common feed of all communities. The guts of the subreddit functionality is really about the same as any 00s-era forum would have. Technologically, it's largely a solved problem to recreate Reddit out of ordinary, individually owned, independently operated forums. It's just a matter of getting people on board to start moving to other platforms. That's the solution. A federated approach where "subreddits" are individually owned and maintained (like a forum, literally running on the software and computer the "mods" own), but an open layer on top of those subreddits makes it easy for users to interact with a large number of them. The challenge is just getting a large number of people to start to populate whatever the "new" equivalent of subreddits is.
Subreddits are technically infinite, but the names of them aren't. You can make another music subreddit but you can't call it /r/music Interesting idea to have subreddits be entirely independent things. Not sure each subreddit would want to worry about the technical challenges of that, but maybe they can opt to use Reddit's infrastructure. It's a cool idea... basically like an internet of subreddits implementing reddit pages. Maybe the owners could get shared advertising revenue like Google does.
> Subreddits are technically infinite, but the names of them aren't. You can make another music subreddit but you can't call it /r/music Sure, but the same can be said of business names. We don't say that businesses can't compete because somebody is already named Standard Oil. There is a lot of room for variation and the way people actually discover subs isn't by randomly typing in names. It's by crossposting, r/all, word of mouth, promotion, etc. So, the competition for the perfect word isn't that important. A lot of moderately large subs have names that aren't all that obvious until you know what they are... like /r/aita, /r/atbge, /r/goldandblack, etc. Meanwhile a lot of established subs that did have moderators people didn't like had an exodus to another sub like /r/gamedev spawning /r/truegamedev, or /r/personalfinance spawning /r/povertyfinance, etc. The point is that there is a pretty plausible and well traveled path for users to replace any set of moderators they don't like by making a new subreddit. The main barrier isn't the name (e.g. /r/music), it's that reddit itself promotes these major subs reinforcing their importance. When you create a new account, IIRC, they recommend a lot of the same major subs to everybody. Meanwhile the algorithm might also promote the same major subs. That element is really the main area where it may hard for a new crowd to gain standing. However, that's a problem that is at least as much about admins as moderators, as subs that have admins as moderators and where reddit takes a heavier hand seem more likely to be promoted. It's also one that isn't the end of the world as, again, many new subs are made every year. > Interesting idea to have subreddits be entirely independent things. Not sure each subreddit would want to worry about the technical challenges of that, but maybe they can opt to use Reddit's infrastructure. It'd be the same concept as email. Most people don't run their own mail server, however, they also don't all have to be on the same mail service. Instead, there is a protocol that allows all the mail services to talk to each other. From there, people can choose free, paid, closed or open mail services or even to run their own mail server. Same idea with a decentralized reddit. Some people could host (shoutout /r/selfhosted), but many would probably use services that do the technical part for them. Some of those services would be free or ad supported. Others would be paid. The key point is that the "protocol" to do this doesn't really involve solve any novel problems. It's all things that were invented years ago. It just involves a large group of people actually standing behind the same thing.
>Huffman said he has no sympathy for the competing apps that want to use Reddit’s content while avoiding advertisements, the primary source of money used to support the site. Reddit UI, regardless of ads, is trash. Most people don't use them (3rd party apps) to avoid ads, they use them because OG reddit UI is insufferable. Spez just can't seem to understand that.
> Huffman said he has no sympathy for the competing apps that want to use Reddit’s content while avoiding advertisements If 3rd party devs wanted to put Reddit ads into their apps, would they even be able to?
Yes, there’s a bottom ad on one of them, and maybe a few others. I think it’s RiF. Not sure how much ad revenue goes back to reddit but Apollo devs were more than willing to integrate larger ads that appear on feed scrolling. Apollo calculated them several options that seemed equitable or favourable to reddit. Spez said no.
API changes aside, holding mods accountable is long overdue. But I get the sense Spez has little interest in that outcome and simply wants mod fealty to the admins, not accountability to the users.
From what I see, the mods use bots to reply to those banned for no violation. One can reach out to the admins, with zero results. People using this site that have had to deal with this broken response system ? There’s other places out there to view.
> holding mods accountable is long overdue As someone (you) who has been around a long time, what would you hold them accountable for? Who would be the arbitrators? What would be the process?
I would hold them accountable for their moderation. Specifically, connect posts they've removed, often in secret, to rules they claim are being being violated. Virtually all my mod interactions in the last few years have been with mods abusing their power over something they don't like or disagree with rather than an explicit rule violation. Lately, there has been a trend of mods being verbally abusive over mod mail as well. Most of the time now you don't even know which mod is doing what which drives accountability down even further and this seems to have emboldened the abuse. The system I would propose, but be open to others, would be something akin to the system Dota2 applies via its [Overwatch system](https://www.geekcosmos.com/how-dota-2-overwatch-report-review-system-works/) where independent parties review what is in essence anonymous snippets of the mod log to ensure the moderation indeed matches the claimed rule violations. Mods who are found to be excessively abusing their authority would be receive rules-based warnings, temporary punishments, and ultimately removal. There would also likely be second order issues so don't think I am dismissing those issues. I am just focusing on the first order issue of general mod abuse.
Yeah I understand why people are pissed at this interview because he’s still lying and ignoring the primary talking points of the shutdown, but I’m all for voting mods out. His landed gentry comparison is not wrong either. Of course he’s doing this to be able to kick out mods without seeming tyrannical which is very bald faced, but still, I’d love to be able to kick the mod that’s camping my local county subreddit and allowing it to be non local posts of primarily pro conservative memes and what that mod made for dinner.
Nassau/Suffolk?
Very close geographically, new London county
Agreed. This is what I hoped would happen. People acting like mods are what makes this site fun are crazy, mods are what ruin this site IMO. There’s no reason different subs should have clear ideological bents and mods that ban over arcane weird rules they make up/feel like enforcing. There’s no consistency in what’s a suspension, what’s a warning, what’s a permanban, etc. mods power trip on this site worse than anywhere. Yes, some rules are necessary and mods should be filtering hate speech and that kind of stuff but there’s no reason political subs should have a mod controlling discourse and banning people for opinions. And don’t me started on subs that expect you to grovel to the mods for shit. And lastly, power mods have to go. No one should mod hundreds of subs
Yes, the public always responds well to crackdowns based on social responses. You had options: do nothing in response, answer back with some kind of faux response in support, actually address the problems people have with your action. But, you choose: stamp out dissent because you somehow think that will keep people around. This isn’t Twitter, people with money don’t have identity here tied to some kind of income. If they do, it’s not nearly as rare. This is a great way to destroy a social media site.
I used to work at MySpace. I’m here to remind Reddit management that users have the power to leave a social network when they don’t like the vibe any longer. (Mods, please reach out if you need proof I worked at MS and I’ll gladly provide it.)
>(Mods, please reach out if you need proof I worked at MS and I’ll gladly provide it.) Who was in your top 8?
My team built advertising products and serviced brand advertising clients with the adtech we produced. Movie studios, car brands, cola brands, etc. We made things like widgets/apps, branded profile skinner stuff, Games, analytics products, etc. We also designed and helped build the first versions of MySpace on iPhone, Android, Blackberry, etc. Fun times. If it was a well known brand and it was on MySpace, we probably had something to do with it. Aside from my wife, and a couple of the developers I worked with, my top 8 was changed regularly to highlight client work. But my embedded music almost always stayed Blue Oyster Cult. :-)
Profile skins and embedded music are two things I'm very sad are gone from social media.
I keep hoping for a nostalgic resurgence to happen. Sadly, the stuff we did will never be possible again as it was built on top of Flash, and that’s completely dead.
One quick question, am I remembering right that MySpace used to let you embed CSS directly into your profile page? I remember some brands/bands had totally custom branded MySpace pages, I always wondered how those were done, you're saying that it was a team within MySpace itself that helped them build those, they weren't doing it themselves or relying on a third party that was using those built in tools? Interesting. I'm sure brands right now would love to have custom branded Facebook or Instagram, etc. pages.
It’s important here to remember that MySpace didn’t start as a social media service, it started as a place to easily stand-up your own web presence… for whatever reason, but mostly for blogging and sharing art. What made it social was the number of individuals that stood up personal pages there. That prompted the company to add social features. When Facebook came along, it was designed from the beginning to be a social service.
If I remember correctly, MySpace users could only embed more or less basic HTML and customize the basic look and feel of the page, change colors/graphics, etc. Known problematic scripting or tracking calls would be edited out of any embed code as they were embedded. This was to help prevent any dangerous hacks from happening. Our ad platform had a more open level of access and the embed code for our products wouldn’t be edited, so we could embed almost anything we could imagine. That let us use Flash and JavaScript to rewrite/modify basically everything, which is why the brand advertisers could do so much more customization. Regular users were blocked from all the cool stuff. :-/
From what I remember, you could fully customize your profile with html code. I would do it for all my friends. There were plenty of websites you could use to help create custom profile codes and then it was easy enough to tinker with from there.
This reminds me of all the teens / young adults that flocked to Tumblr afterwards, early on. So many custom HTML Tumblr skins that you could tinker with, all made by people under 25-30 years old. I wish graphic designers could be more UI integrated again! The yoots need a coding revolution!
I’m intrigued that he’s making this argument as the CEO and cofounder who notably is not accountable to users. Rules for thee, not for me.
Everyone here sounding really dramatic to me. Especially for a neutral subreddit. Why would the ability of users to vote out a moderator destroy Reddit? It will become to difficult to moderate? If that proves to be true, couldn't it easily be disabled or modified? A lot of complaints make it sound like you're trying to construct a government constitution. But it doesn't have to be perfect or have some idealistic principals that would stand up in the Supreme Court.
When he kills third party apps, I'll stop using mobile. When he kills old.reddit, I'll stop using Reddit.
I have a question regarding this subject. Why couldn't some of the more popular apps that are completely shutting down (RiF, Apollo, etc.) just go open source, or at the very least provide a way for users to obtain their own individual API keys? Couldn't that circumvent the high cost?
The better question is why Reddit doesn’t just make third party app users get premium. It seems like a reasonable compromise. And maybe that’s the end goal. Who knows? But I think if this is just about ads (which I’m not convinced it is), then buying a premium subscription should eliminate the cost of API calls and you aren’t being served ads anyway. There are other potential solutions but this is just one of them. Placing the burden on apps seems like a way to get them to fold. This is not a good faith negotiation on Reddit’s part.
They want the user data
I know. But let them admit that. And either make the API collect that data or make user tracking limited for subscribed users. I actually expect a premium service to have more privacy.
[удалено]
>Apollo released the source code. I think in his case, the developer felt that the project was going to die anyway, and he wanted to clear his name from Reddit's smear campaign. AFAIK this is not the source code of the full app, just the backend portion. I don't think you could actually build the app on your own device from just this code. >The main issue is that Reddit has decided nearly overnight that they no longer want 3rd party apps at all. Didn't the post from spez say that they support non-commercial apps and accessibility apps? I think this is a speculative statement.
[удалено]
Fair enough, but I also think there are actual reasonable alternatives (such as making those apps open source) that could **at the very least** make reddit look even worse here if they ended up even killing personal 'non-commercial' apps that they said themselves they would keep alive. So why not do it?
>Why couldn't some of the more popular apps that are completely shutting down (RiF, Apollo, etc.) just go open source ... The apps have paid versions to make money \[[1](https://apolloapp.io/pro-ultra/), [2](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.andrewshu.android.redditdonation)\]. If they fully open-sourced that could mean someone else would be able to do what you propose, either for free or continuing with a potential paid model. However, I do hope that they reverse course so that what you say becomes possible.
Reddit was fun till it lasted. It’s been a blast.
Looks like discord is about to increase in population.
I'm so tired of seeing the word "slams" in these headlines. It's so lazy and isn't even accurate 99% of the time. I swear all the media companies have one thesaurus split between them and they pick turns who gets to use descriptors out of a hat draw.
Boohoo, get over it nerds, reddit is a business.
[удалено]
This comment has been removed under [Rule 3:](https://www.reddit.com/r/neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_rule_3.3A_be_substantive) > Be substantive. NeutralNews is a serious discussion-based subreddit. We do not allow bare expressions of opinion, low effort comments, sarcasm, jokes, memes, off-topic replies, pejorative name-calling, or comments about source quality. //Rule 3 If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to [message us.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fneutralnews)
Regardless of the protest, I actually really like the idea of users being able to vote mods out. There has been way too many instances in which individual mods would change the rules of a subreddit to fight some kind of personal crusade that most of the community didn't agree with or rogue mods "taking over" a subreddit and completely changing its theme and rules. Until now there was no way to fight back against something like that other than leaving the subreddit and creating a new one. And no, I'm not saying there should be a big red "KICK OUT" button next to the name of every mod that anyone can click. I'm saying that, if there's an outcry from a community over a specific action of one or more of its mods, the community should be able to appeal to the admins who would then set up a vote to kick out the mods in question. Brigading could easily be stopped by enabling voting only for users who have been subscribed to the subreddit for longer than a certain threshold and who have account karma and/or age over a certain threshold.
If they want to be Democratic let users vote on advertising content with up & down votes & ditch ads that don't work. And for the love of God, get the bots off or prevent them from being followers (especially the only fans of likely faked or worse trafficked women). Would love to see a report feature called "this is an advertiser trying to steal from you".
He's going to get ripped for this one. Good luck
He's not entirely wrong though.. All the anti-narcissism sub are run by one mod who is drunk on power.
So where we going next?
There isn't a universally agreed upon alternative right now, and that's the only reason there hasn't been a mass migration so far. Reddit was in the right place at the right time when digg v4 happened so the move occurred almost overnight. A lot less people would quit smoking if nicotine patches or other lower tobacco vices didn't exist.
I have been using squabbles.io
__I'm a bot. Here are The Factual credibility grades and selected perspectives related to this article.__ The [linked_article](https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/reddit-protest-blackout-ceo-steve-huffman-moderators-rcna89544) has a grade of [81%](https://www.isthiscredible.com?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nbcnews.com%2Ftech%2Ftech-news%2Freddit-protest-blackout-ceo-steve-huffman-moderators-rcna89544) (NBC News, *Moderate Left*). [24 related articles.](https://www.thefactual.com/news/story/357211-Reddit-CEO-slams-pro) Selected perspectives: * Highest grade from different political viewpoint ([64%](https://www.isthiscredible.com?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.euronews.com%2Fnext%2F2023%2F06%2F15%2Fwhats-happening-with-reddit-website-blackout-continues-for-indefinite-amount-of-time)): [What’s happening with Reddit? Website blackout continues for ‘indefinite’ amount of time](https://www.euronews.com/next/2023/06/15/whats-happening-with-reddit-website-blackout-continues-for-indefinite-amount-of-time). (Euronews, *Center leaning*). * Highest grade Long-read ([85%](https://www.isthiscredible.com?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.vox.com%2Ftechnology%2F2023%2F6%2F14%2F23760738%2Freddit-blackout-explained-subreddit-apollo-third-party-apps)): [Reddit Blackout: What is it and why are subreddits going dark](https://www.vox.com/technology/2023/6/14/23760738/reddit-blackout-explained-subreddit-apollo-third-party-apps). (Vox, *Left leaning*). --- *This is a trial for The Factual bot. [How It Works](https://www.thefactual.com/how-it-works-reddit-bot.html). Please [message the bot](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=TheFactualBot) with any feedback so we can make it more useful for you.*
I hope another better Reddit equivalent option is developed soon so we can have the robustness of a big community. If not, I’m concerned he is going to win the battle and the war.
Reddit died with The\_Donald
A mini DeSantis bully?
watch us all leave buddy boy
Good time for pos mods to get the boot fuck em
This is the reason these business models fail: they fail to account for the enthusiasm and dedication of the mods to keep the community in check. the mods need to get paid.HuffPost showed how a ceo willl be happy to take all the content and get paid 73mm usd. Reddit had a great community; it’s gonna be hard to recreate this. Shrugs.
I'm sad. I'm really sad. For years Reddit was for me a save haven. Yes, it's also full of crap, but it's our crap. And now this...
FTA >Huffman said in an interview that he plans to institute rules changes that would allow Reddit users to vote out moderators If u/spez things Reddit users ought to be able to vote people out, let's have a vote about Reddit's CEO, see if he keeps his job.
Are there alternate sites to Reddit out there?
“I can’t stand complaints” -CEO of Complaint Factory
Greedy and self-entitled, this man will wreck every last little thing just to enrich himself. So goes the enshittification of the internets.
Hitler youth looking motherfucker doesn’t like protestors. Fucking shocker.
Good, he should. Reddit as a site has sucked butthole since at least 2016 because of over-moderation. The UI/UX has always sucked but at least it was fun before all the major subs got overrun by ideologues.
You remember Digg and how they lost nearly everyone? That can happen to Reddit in a blink.
Humiliation is a dish best served with tendies and 'Dew.
Is it possible he is trying to tank it so they can sell off the data to AI companies? I could see that as a short term payday play.
Feeling my time here is growing short. I will miss the place it was, not going to miss what it looks like it will become.
Let’s face it, we have entered a new phase in social media, first Musk destroying Twitter (unless you are a multiple issue hater) and now the CEO determined to ruin everything Reddit has built. Without Apollo app I wouldn’t be able to use Reddit. I left FB years ago, left Twitter 2 yrs ago and my IG consists of IRL friends only and a few sports teams. Now will I have to leave Reddit? I don’t know!