Reddit reported a big increase in sales for the first quarter and said second-quarter revenue will jump by more than 30%, based on the midpoint of the range.
Just in case someone thinks this is a troll or wild accusation, it’s literally true. (Edit: Or… I don’t know specifically that he’s a pedophile, but it would seem a little surprising for anyone who isn’t a pedophile to participate in an explicitly pedophilic community let alone agree to publicly moderate it.)
You could add anyone as a mod to a sub you moderated, he was added as a joke
Even more context they did give the guy who ran it and most the other nswf subs a special award before media controversy got them to ban the most problematic subs. So really it’s a somewhat unfair statement but he was clearly aware of the sub and did nothing until forced.
The comment editing was clearly a joke because the Trump sub was pinging him in posts insulting him for enforcing moderation policy against them - he set it to change ‘fuck @spez’ to ‘I love spez’ or similar.
You could add anyone as a mod to a sub you moderated, he was added as a joke
Even more context they did give the guy who ran it and most the other nswf subs a special award
Fair point. He could be just an absolute bonehead who for whatever reason wasn’t able to process that he needed to get the avowed overt pedophilic activity off his server, and didn’t see the problem even with them joking around about how he was on their side and giving them an award. There’s no particular reason to think that he himself has any inclination that way.
The comment editing was clearly a joke
This is a perfect example of something that’s a joke when you’re the one with the power, but if you’re the one on the receiving end is absolutely not a joke.
I suspect that if someone at Google (or whatever) was editing spez’s emails for any reason “as a joke” then he wouldn’t be entertained by it in any capacity or think it was okay, however harmless their edits were according to them.
There is a huge difference between subtly changing posts in secret and very obviously doing it to poke fun at people attacking you without any intention of secrecy.
I don’t think it was a great thing to do because unserious trolls like the nimble navigators were bound to try and sell it as a big deal and as we see it’ll echo for ages by people repeating the most salacious elements without context. I don’t think it’s anything shocking, moot used to use identical word filter tactics against the very same people and they laughed at it, users found it funny at the time too until they realized it was expedient to be outraged.
I’m here because I dislike Spez and how he runs things, but I think it’s important to have good arguments not paper thin mock outrage.
Can I give you a list of substitutions which you will then have to apply to your comments going forward, and go back and edit your past comments to apply? Would you agree to that? For your convenience I can give you a set of links to click to apply the edits.
I promise (for real) that I’ll only do it to poke fun.
All I’m saying is there is a difference and that it is deceptive to present it like it’s one thing when it’s something else because you know that it’ll be more effective at convincing people of the thing you want them to think.
Just say what actually happened if you genuinely believe it’s exactly as bad.
I think ActivityPub requires that a message purported to be from some user needs to be signed with their private key (in practice, the key that their instance keeps track of on their behalf).
I’m not 100% sure of that but I think it’s how it works. So you would have to entice the people you dislike into making users on your instance, or else come up with some other way of gaming the system. (And, I think you’d be defederated from everyone almost instantly.)
Fun fact, lemmy.ml actually does automatically edit users’ posts to remove certain curse words. Even that seems to me absurdly authoritarian in this weird specific nanny-state type of way (like – they could make a feature where you can decide to have a set of words censored on the reading side, for posts from any instance – but no, they deliberately decided to police their user’s posts for everyone, and remove the ability for their users to more successfully achieve the supposed goal). It offends me probably more than it should.
Just in case someone thinks this is a troll or wild accusation, it’s literally true. (Edit: Or… I don’t know specifically that he’s a pedophile, but it would seem a little surprising for anyone who isn’t a pedophile to participate in an explicitly pedophilic community let alone agree to publicly moderate it.)
He also – I hadn’t known this – would edit people’s comments on the site that were critical of him.
Two key notes for anyone wanting context
You could add anyone as a mod to a sub you moderated, he was added as a joke
Even more context they did give the guy who ran it and most the other nswf subs a special award before media controversy got them to ban the most problematic subs. So really it’s a somewhat unfair statement but he was clearly aware of the sub and did nothing until forced.
The comment editing was clearly a joke because the Trump sub was pinging him in posts insulting him for enforcing moderation policy against them - he set it to change ‘fuck @spez’ to ‘I love spez’ or similar.
Fair point. He could be just an absolute bonehead who for whatever reason wasn’t able to process that he needed to get the avowed overt pedophilic activity off his server, and didn’t see the problem even with them joking around about how he was on their side and giving them an award. There’s no particular reason to think that he himself has any inclination that way.
This is a perfect example of something that’s a joke when you’re the one with the power, but if you’re the one on the receiving end is absolutely not a joke.
I suspect that if someone at Google (or whatever) was editing spez’s emails for any reason “as a joke” then he wouldn’t be entertained by it in any capacity or think it was okay, however harmless their edits were according to them.
There is a huge difference between subtly changing posts in secret and very obviously doing it to poke fun at people attacking you without any intention of secrecy.
I don’t think it was a great thing to do because unserious trolls like the nimble navigators were bound to try and sell it as a big deal and as we see it’ll echo for ages by people repeating the most salacious elements without context. I don’t think it’s anything shocking, moot used to use identical word filter tactics against the very same people and they laughed at it, users found it funny at the time too until they realized it was expedient to be outraged.
I’m here because I dislike Spez and how he runs things, but I think it’s important to have good arguments not paper thin mock outrage.
Can I give you a list of substitutions which you will then have to apply to your comments going forward, and go back and edit your past comments to apply? Would you agree to that? For your convenience I can give you a set of links to click to apply the edits.
I promise (for real) that I’ll only do it to poke fun.
All I’m saying is there is a difference and that it is deceptive to present it like it’s one thing when it’s something else because you know that it’ll be more effective at convincing people of the thing you want them to think.
Just say what actually happened if you genuinely believe it’s exactly as bad.
I wonder what it would take to run a hostile lemmy instance, just designed to drag people you dislike via putting words in their mouth.
I think ActivityPub requires that a message purported to be from some user needs to be signed with their private key (in practice, the key that their instance keeps track of on their behalf).
I’m not 100% sure of that but I think it’s how it works. So you would have to entice the people you dislike into making users on your instance, or else come up with some other way of gaming the system. (And, I think you’d be defederated from everyone almost instantly.)
Fun fact, lemmy.ml actually does automatically edit users’ posts to remove certain curse words. Even that seems to me absurdly authoritarian in this weird specific nanny-state type of way (like – they could make a feature where you can decide to have a set of words censored on the reading side, for posts from any instance – but no, they deliberately decided to police their user’s posts for everyone, and remove the ability for their users to more successfully achieve the supposed goal). It offends me probably more than it should.
Alright thanks I’ll work on it