Reddit is well on it's way to becoming a dominant monopoly on the web, however there's a (subtle but important) difference between being a platform for free speech, and promoting hate speech.
If there are a billion users, but they're horrible people (eg /r/coontown), is that something you will look back on and consider as having been worthwhile?
As a five-year Redditor, this is an awesome question, but I have two potential ways to better ask it:
1. I wouldn't ask about a billion horrible people. Don't forget that the user number reflects logged-out consumers, and Reddit is still limited to far fewer participants. The demographics of people that choose to make an account and participate are very likely strongly disconnected from the circumstances required to make Reddit a billion-eyeball property. Maybe a better question would be "what can Reddit do to appeal to participation from non-teenaged and non-twentysomething white males who think /r/spacedicks is funny?"
2. I wouldn't ask about his perspective on things like coontown from the perspective of an investment, I'd ask him his thoughts on controversial speech on Reddit in general, as well as Reddit's responsibilities to act in the service of protecting free speech. /r/coontown is only the latest. Don't forget there was /r/jailbait before it and the banning of all Zoe Quinn discussion and subreddits, as well as vast numbers of communities that you and I both will not mention that are even worse than those already named.
(Warning to those unfamiliar with Reddit: please do not investigate things like spacedicks or coontown if you are sensitive.)
I am a regular poster on r/theredpill(which was recently "honored" by winning the bigotry category---but with low toxicity---in a recent sentiment analysis of reddit comments). There is a lot of what someone might call "hate speech." Some of that doesn't really deserve the title and is just "truths that polite society omits;" some reflects genuine, generalized anger against women.
The subreddit has grown like a rocket. There are multiple backup plans for where to move the community in case the subreddit gets shut down. In short: there is something there that draws people, for better or for worse.
One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist, etc.
The Red Pill an organization of freedom fighters? We're comparing feminists to ISIS now?
Genuine, generalized anger against women? What are you upset about, that it's fallen out of favor to feel up a woman at a bar without permission before you begin a courtship that ends with her in the kitchen as your property with your dinner on the table at 5:30? Upset that you can't give her two black eyes for finishing dinner at 5:31 and keep custody of the kids because judges are pretty much out of patience for male shenanigans? Mad because "alpha male" means something different today than it did throughout history, and you miss the old ways? Do you honestly look yourself in the mirror and say "I'm championing the causes of men by participating in a community that started as a haven for pickup artists and uses The Matrix references as pseudointellectualism?"
Stop me, I'm laughing so hard I'm getting lightheaded.
I would have never predicted someone who speaks positively of The Red Pill works in the subset of technology that made him aware of Hacker News, and all that does is make me rethink what I thought was a typical level of intelligence to work in this field.
Your organization grows because there are lot of pieces of shit in the male gender, and everybody likes validation that there are other pieces of shit like them. Why do you think Stormfront grew so quickly? "Yay, a whole forum of people just like me!" That's exactly why. Believe me when I tell you that I can't wait for the SPLC to list you, just like they did Stormfront, because you are just about as antiprogressive and awful.
I am a pretty strong feminist, and agree that a comparison to ISIS is far off base.
Nevertheless, I believe that one reason for the backlash against feminism is the perception that feminists are spiteful and would rather argue against straw men and make ad hominem attacks than actually argue their point of view.
Actually, I've found that most feminists are surprisingly patient and eager to explain their point of view and their experiences with sexism, even to skeptics or to ideological opponents. Although I've learned that feminists have a very good point whether or not they are being nice, it was by meeting and talking with such feminists that I was converted to their cause.
No. I will not back down from calling spades spades because I represent no group, only speak for myself, and I am under no obligation to alter my views or politicize my actions because of vague backlash reasons (you interestingly avoided telling me why you were urging me throughout that entire comment, if you read carefully).
You might have identified a box into which to label and place me, but I assure you that I remain independent of all labels; my opinions are not based in feminism, yet our views happen to align in this case. I am not championing a cause that requires me to convert anyone. I am calling a representative of The Red Pill an idiot for attempting a cogent argument in their defense on Hacker News. If I were defending feminism, I'd be operating much differently.
Attachment to a group and worrying about the group is a prison from speaking about what is important to you in your own way.
Put yourself in my shoes for a moment. Consider, after a brief period of calling out someone for speaking positively about a hate group on Hacker News, coming back after moving on to find a directive to stop and a comment from a former Reddit employee and administrator calling for the thread to be censored.
I'm not sure what I did. If you'd like to follow up via e-mail, please do. I'm concerned.
> I would have never predicted someone who speaks positively of The Red Pill works in the subset of technology that made him aware of Hacker News, and all that does is make me rethink what I thought was a typical level of intelligence to work in this field.
There was an influx of TheRedPill users a few hundred (300? 500?) days ago. Most of them ended up getting shaddowbanned within a week or so. A few stuck around. There's also a bunch of people with similar views but who have never visited that subreddit.
I'm not really interested in defending the subreddit. I am attempting to add a dash of reality: hate speech cannot be eliminated by clamping down on any particular subreddit. There will always be somewhere on the internet for people to express hateful, offensive views.
Of course, that's exactly the kind of thing a misogynist would say. And you could make a case that just because you can't stamp the stuff out entirely doesn't mean you have to let it happen on your servers.
If there are a billion users, but they're horrible people (eg /r/coontown), is that something you will look back on and consider as having been worthwhile?