←back to thread

Reddit CEO admits to altering user comments that were critical of him

(www.reddit.com)
668 points wildmusings | 1 comments | 24 Nov 16 00:50 UTC | HN request time: 0.2s | source
Show context
JorgeGT ◴[24 Nov 16 01:04 UTC] No.13027099[source]▶
And without an "edited" mark, which means that any comment of any user can be covertly modified by an admin. Very concerning since Reddit comments have provoked even Congress hearings: http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/296680-house-pan...
replies(7): >>13027119 #>>13027125 #>>13027136 #>>13027240 #>>13027734 #>>13028391 #>>13033721 #
dvt ◴[24 Nov 16 01:12 UTC] No.13027125[source]▶
It's more concerning that Congress is that stupid (one can only hope the Courts haven't been making rulings based on untraced emails and anonymous tweets). Social media is a canonical exemplar of hearsay.

There's a reason Wikipedia isn't an acceptable source in college-level courses.

replies(6): >>13027147 #>>13027170 #>>13027187 #>>13027263 #>>13027329 #>>13028742 #
1. Ph0X ◴[24 Nov 16 01:34 UTC] No.13027263[source]▶
Reddit isn't meant to be a source nor is Wikipedia, but it's a place to find information. They can be seen as central hubs to get information.

If a person comments on Reddit with a valid point and sources all his facts, why does it matter where said comment is made, and honestly, it doesn't matter if admins can edit it or not, really.

Look at it like posting an EXE and also linking to a credible site containing it's checksum. As long as you trust the linked site, then it doesn't matter where the EXE is posted and if someone has access to modifiying the EXE, all that matters is that 1. you got the data, 2. the data checksum matches the source.