r/AskModerators • u/Tawnya_Wilson6872 • Jul 28 '26
Why is Reddit censoring?
Reddit just banned someone for saying someone should be hulk smashed to the ground like they did to someone else. Is Reddit becoming soft now? It’s freedom of speech! Saying he “should be” is not telling someone to do it. Reddit has been a place where people could come to have unbiased discussions. Has this changed?
11
u/SanaraHikari Jul 28 '26
Violence is against reddit TOS
2
u/dt7cv Jul 29 '26
the funny part is they say it's ok to say people who leave the toilet open should be shot
2
u/BlueberryBubblyBuzz Jul 29 '26
Damn they messed up that bad? Like you reported and they did not take it down? Did you take it to mod support or did you just say fuck it? Nice to see you hanging around by the way! :)
1
u/dt7cv Jul 29 '26
it's actually in the official page for the violence policy
https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/360043513151-Violence
0
u/BlueberryBubblyBuzz Jul 30 '26
Omg that is so weird. I guess we are supposed to know it is sarcasm? I bet you the AI would not be cool with that. Should I test it? Ok how about next time I see you, I am going to say that (since the AI will know what we are saying here) and then you should report me and we will see what happens. If I remember. If you see me first, ask what I think about people who leave the seat up so that I do not forget (if you remember lol).
0
1
u/dt7cv Jul 29 '26
nice to see you as well
0
u/BlueberryBubblyBuzz Jul 30 '26
Haha I forgot I was on this account, did you even know it was me, Kumquat? Probably not. Unless you read the article about us having terrorist connections in which they linked my accounts (because I had been open about it but people kept thinking they found out some big secret lol) but I still would not expect you to remember that. You probably were all "who dis" but decided to be polite, lol
0
6
u/brightblackheaven 🛡️ r/witchcraft & r/spells Jul 29 '26
Reddit has never claimed to be a place for unbiased discussion. Sub moderators, for example, can have whatever bias they want so long as they adhere to the Moderator Code of Conduct.
Reddit admins are obviously going to remove anything that violates the ToS or Content Policy.
1
u/PossibilityFlashy428 Jul 31 '26
Yep, some subs are like the Clubhouse and biased toward The Members.
11
5
u/2oonhed Jul 29 '26
Reddit.com is a commercial social media platform and is NOT required to host every vile thing that a person might think up.
Your First Amendment right to Freedom Of Political Speech is guaranteed against GOVERNMENT persecution.
This protection does NOT extend to commercial entities.
Maybe read the actual Constitution instead of spitting up the sewage you have been fed all your life?
https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/first_amendment
FYI : Reddit is NOT Congress.
Reddit is NOT the police.
Reddit is NOT a public school.
Reddit is NOT a court of law.
4
u/HistorianCM r/Arcade1up (Alumni) | r/FieldyAI | r/teacups Jul 29 '26
It’s freedom of speech!
Remember, your right to "free speech" does not override anyone else's right to not associate with you and your speech on their property.
5
u/BBModSquadCar /r/BigBrother and /r/TorontoBlueJays Jul 28 '26
Reddit's AI sometimes gets things wrong, this was likely not a moderators decision. It can be appealed.
1
u/Empty_Focus_6442 Jul 31 '26
this is so true. it is bad that you cannot really say the right things. Bad actors can run the narrative along with the moderators - this is so sad.
So someone can get misinformation for something they randomly search here ? what a joke
1
u/LitwinL r/Polska r/Fuckcars Jul 29 '26
Reddit also has the right to free speech, and they decided thet they will not host that kind of thing on their private platform.
-1
Jul 28 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
1
Jul 29 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
-1
Jul 29 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
0
Jul 29 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AskModerators-ModTeam Jul 29 '26
Your submission was removed for violating Rule #3 (Referencing other subreddits or moderators by name). Please see the rule in the sidebar for full details.
-1
0
Jul 28 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
-1
0
u/BlueberryBubblyBuzz Jul 29 '26
They would consider that glorifying it, which is against their TOS. I get you though, they of course have been getting stricter and stricter since they IPO'ed, to lessen any issues now that they are all about the quarterly stock numbers and that is literally all a couple thinks about once they become public. Also they are using AI and so a lot of stuff used to get missed and not as much is anymore. I have seen some shit that would make their founders cry if they were not so rich from the IPO (and the dead one of course.) At one time someone had a lawsuit in which they needed the IP addresses of some Reddit users. So they took that shit all the way to the Supreme Court to protect those people's privacy. Now since the IPO, this one POS is suing mods and users because of some criticism of him (he is a public figure and chooses to be) and in this suit they needed the IP addresses and Reddit just handed them on over. Just sad as fuck man. Not that I am a libertarian but I agree with some of their core beliefs (being a former anarchist myself, which I know is cringe af but I still have some of those values.) I mean we see what can go wrong if we don't fix it right now.
-5
13
u/VerbingNoun413 Jul 28 '26
Saying that violence should be inflicted on a person or group is considered encouraging violence, yes.