Site Dedicated to Freedom of Speach Bans Dissenting Views

[3MTA3]

Reddit and weep: Reddit bans comments from climate-change skeptics | The Daily Caller

Read More

 

[rufus]

If you're not capable of providing the science, then STHU. Using climate-change believer logic it makes perfect sense.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

No surprise, I've seen lots of this, online. The funniest was a site dedicated to a persecuted lifestyle that had a quote

Freedom must be freely given to others in order for you to be free

And they banned several people they didn't agree with

 

[simon99]

People that have a gun to their head, in a figurative or literal sense, often acquiesce to your way of thinking....

 

[Audrey]

This is really a misunderstanding of Reddit by the person writing the article and people complaining.

Reddit is broken down into subreddits, which /r/science is one. The subreddits are moderated just like a web forum. As much as there is free speech each subreddit has its own rules for posting content, and it's always listed across the top or along the right edge of the subreddit. The rules for posting in /r/science are as follows:

Please ensure that your submission to r/science is :

1. a direct link to or a summary of peer reviewed research with appropriate citations. If the article itself does not link to these sources, please include a link in a comment. Summaries of summaries are not allowed.
2. based on recent scientific research. The research linked to should be within the past 6 months (or so).
3. not editorialized, sensationalized, or biased. This includes both the submission and its title.
4. not blogspam, an image, video or an infographic.
5. not a repost. If an alternate report based on the same research has been submitted, please submit your article as a comment to one of the current submissions.

Please ensure that your comment on an r/science thread is :

1. on-topic and relevant to the submission.
2. not a joke, meme, or off-topic, these will be removed.
3. not hateful, offensive, spam, or otherwise unacceptable.

This particular subreddit is quite picky about its posts and heavily moderated. I would say that a majority of daily redditors are very familiar with this concept.

 

[Burt Gummer]

We will eventually follow Europe's lead and those that expose government lies, and deceptions perpetuated by TPTB will be arrested and imprisoned.

 

[simon99]

We will eventually follow Europe's lead and those that expose government lies, and lies perpetuated by TPTB will be arrested and imprisoned.

Only if the apathetic allow it....and I think a lot of blood will be spilled on both sides.

 

[OLDNEWBIE]

This is really a misunderstanding of Reddit by the person writing the article and people complaining.

Reddit is broken down into subreddits, which /r/science is one. The subreddits are moderated just like a web forum. As much as there is free speech each subreddit has its own rules for posting content, and it's always listed across the top or along the right edge of the subreddit. The rules for posting in /r/science are as follows:



This particular subreddit is quite picky about its posts and heavily moderated. I would say that a majority of daily redditors are very familiar with this concept.

"Despite the provocative comments on both sides described by Allen, and Reddit's reputation as "passionately dedicated to free speech," the self-described "PhD chemist" decided it was time for the skeptics to go."
Sounds like they are just shutting out one side to me but maybe the author didn't explain it well enough.

 

[Audrey]

"Reddit's reputation as "passionately dedicated to free speech," the self-described "PhD chemist" decided it was time for the skeptics to go."

It is free speech, but within individual subreddits it is moderated. If you come into a forum and type something off-topic it will be removed or moved (in Reddit mods cannot "move" posts to other subreddits). It's no different than you coming into my house, saying something I dislike, and me throwing you out. You're free to have those thoughts, but not in my moderated space (house). There are other more appropriate subreddits for pretty much any type of discussion.

 

[OLDNEWBIE]

It is free speech, but within individual subreddits it is moderated. In the USA we have free speech, but if you come into a forum and type something off-topic it will be removed or moved (in Reddit mods cannot "move" posts to other subreddits). It's no different than you coming into my house, saying something I dislike, and me throwing you out. You're free to have those thoughts, but not in my moderated space (house). There are other more appropriate subreddits for pretty much any type of discussion.

So somewhere on REDDIT there is a place to argue both sides of this fear mongering that used to be called global warming LOL? If that's the case then thanks for setting it straight.

 

[Grunwald]

Anyone else noticed that the moderator mentioned is a chemist?
Climatology is not exactly his area of expertise.

A proctologist and a neurologist are both medical doctors but I certainly would not want Mr. Brownfinger poking aroung in my brain.

 

[Audrey]

So somewhere on REDDIT there is a place to argue both sides of this fear mongering that used to be called global warming LOL? If that's the case then thanks for setting it straight.

You could do it easily in /r/AskReddit if you posed the question properly. There are some subreddits linked in the sidebar of /r/Conservative, but they seem more political than scientific. You could request/discuss information generally on the topic in /r/AskScience too.

I have a feeling the originally posted study to /r/science by the author somehow failed to meet the peer reviewed research from within the past six months or another rule. I don't really follow the science or political related subreddits myself, so I cannot speak to that directly.

 

[Audrey]

Anyone else noticed that the moderator mentioned is a chemist?
Climatology is not exactly his area of expertise.

To be fair, once you've learned how to read peer reviewed research it can be applied to many fields. E.g., I am better at shooting a rifle than I am a pistol, but I can still recognize the I forgot to close bolt on the pistol and that's why my shot did not fire; I understand how a gun works at a basic use level.

 

[simon99]

To be fair, once you've learned how to read peer reviewed research it can be applied to many fields. E.g., I am better at shooting a rifle than I am a pistol, but I can still recognize the I forgot to close bolt on the pistol and that's why my shot did not fire; I understand how a gun works at a basic use level.

There are many intelligent people on every forum that have dissenting viewpoints. Are the views they offer no less valuable?

As with most supposed bastions of intellect and freedom, going against the liberal minded status quo seems to be a sure-fire way to get blacklisted.....it appears that's the case in this situation as well.

 

[Audrey]

Most subreddits see divergent topics as trolling, because attempts at trolling are very, very common in Reddit. For example, if I posted in /r/mensrights something about feminism, or a picture of a "cute pug" in /r/corgi they'd be removed as trolling.

I am not saying this person in the article was trolling. I am explaining that subreddits are topical groups that intentionally moderate. The site as a whole is free speech, but you still have to follow each subreddit's rules. I do not think /r/science would remove something for dissenting, but would remove something for not meeting their predescribed (in the sidebar) criteria.

 

[simon99]

Most subreddits see divergent topics as trolling, because attempts at trolling are very, very common in Reddit. For example, if I posted in /r/mensrights something about feminism, or a picture of a "cute pug" in /r/corgi they'd be removed as trolling.

I am not saying this person in the article was trolling. I am explaining that subreddits are topical groups that intentionally moderate. The site as a whole is free speech, but you still have to follow each subreddit's rules. I do not think /r/science would remove something for dissenting, but would remove something for not meeting their predescribed (in the sidebar) criteria.

I understand....

But the point of this thread is that its really not a "free speech" site is it? By your definition ( post #15) it would be akin to opening a business that sells men's clothing. I claim that I am a great person, open to everyone regardless of religious beliefs, ethnicity, language, sex, creed, whatever.....
However, upon walking into my store I post a sign that says, If you drink tea over coffee you're not welcome. If you like football over baseball you're not welcome. If you like pizza over hamburgers you're not welcome...etc. Welcome to Reddit!

If you create a "forum" where you wish to openly discuss topics that are most certainly going to delve into political/religious, etc areas but start them with the caveat that people can only agree rather than disagree.....well that Audrey isn't very agreeable is it?

 

[Audrey]

It's free speech as much as anywhere else is online. If there are moderators then there are obviously rules. Speak freely, but please pay attention to your whereabouts/category (subreddit). If there was zero organization I don't think it's be as popular. Subreddits are just a way to organize the chaos.

 

[simon99]

It's free speech as much as anywhere else is online. If there are moderators then there are obviously rules. Speak freely, but please pay attention to your whereabouts/category (subreddit). If there was zero organization I don't think it's be as popular. Subreddits are just a way to organize the chaos.

Sounds kinda like gun laws that some call " common sense"......

 

[U201491]

Reddit and weep: Reddit bans comments from climate-change skeptics | The Daily Caller

Oh well, they do have the right to ban anyone they want. It is not a government funded site.
Libs don't want conservatives on their sites and conservatives don't want leftists on theirs. It is like oil and water and
just screws up threads for what ever the task is at the time.
I can understand their reasoning, but there should not be any use of freedom in their descriptions

 

[OLDNEWBIE]

The real test I guess is trying to start a thread or whatever those libs at REDDIT call it (LOL) about the advantages of owning a gun. If you get tired of the antis/trolls whatever and you can ban opposing comments then it's an unbiased site. Either way I've heard and seen good/bad things on REDDIT that I couldn't see elsewhere, like gory pics at the Boston Bombing that the MSM thought the public need not see at the time. I don't like MSM censorship. We get enough of that Nanny State BS from our govt.!