Most active commenters

    ←back to thread

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

    (www.reddit.com)
    668 points wildmusings | 12 comments | 24 Nov 16 00:50 UTC | HN request time: 0.529s | source | bottom
    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 #
    dhruval ◴[24 Nov 16 01:29 UTC] No.13027240[source]▶
    He changed a 'F U CEO' (upvoted by 1.6k users) comment to 'F U unpaid reddit moderator', without any indication that the comment was edited.

    Very juvenile and unprofessional way of dealing with the situation, really erodes trust in the platform (simply deleting the comment would have been a better response).

    Would maybe expect this from the founder of a young fledgling startup, but the 33 year old CEO of a company like Reddit ought to know better.

    replies(7): >>13027341 #>>13027345 #>>13027894 #>>13028550 #>>13028557 #>>13031901 #>>13032509 #
    MicroBerto ◴[24 Nov 16 03:52 UTC] No.13027894[source]▶
    This is an offense worth firing someone over in a "real" company...
    replies(1): >>13028108 #
    1. 27182818284 ◴[24 Nov 16 04:31 UTC] No.13028108[source]▶
    Facebook, etc terminated those with power for doing things like stalking on an ex-girlfriend. This seems similar. It is an abuse of power, and frankly, we don't know if this is the first time it has happened—it simply might have been the most extreme case
    replies(2): >>13028802 #>>13029271 #
    2. Dylan16807 ◴[24 Nov 16 07:19 UTC] No.13028802[source]▶
    This is not similar to stalking.
    replies(1): >>13028850 #
    3. bobzimuta ◴[24 Nov 16 07:32 UTC] No.13028850[source]▶
    Yeah it's worse. Using a privileged position to discredit opposition under the cover of "lolz."
    replies(1): >>13029141 #
    4. CmdrSprinkles ◴[24 Nov 16 08:56 UTC] No.13029141{3}[source]▶
    No... it really isn't. This is abusing power to attempt to manipulate public opinion on a message board. Stalking is a horrible invasion of privacy that has a tendency to escalate into violence. And even when it doesn't, it results in drastically increased anxiety and fear for the person being stalked if they find out.
    replies(1): >>13037237 #
    5. gspetr ◴[24 Nov 16 09:28 UTC] No.13029271[source]▶
    I wouldn't put it above Zuckerberg himself to do it.

    http://www.theweek.co.uk/facebook/14625/are-users-dumb-fucks...

    From that article:

    During the conversation, Zuckerberg writes: "Yeah so if you ever need info about anyone at Harvard, just ask. I have over 4,000 emails, pictures, addresses, SNS."

    When the friend asks him how he got the information, Zuckerberg replies: "People just submitted it. I don't know why. They 'trust me'. Dumb fucks."

    replies(2): >>13029445 #>>13033029 #
    6. Caprinicus ◴[24 Nov 16 10:06 UTC] No.13029445[source]▶
    He's almost certainly still the asshole he was then, but there's a pretty large gap between abusing access to a website you run in college and abusing access to a website you're payed to be the CEO of in your 30s.
    replies(1): >>13029564 #
    7. blake8086 ◴[24 Nov 16 10:35 UTC] No.13029564{3}[source]▶
    Do you think he might have changed in 13 years? I don't really feel quite the same as I did 13 years ago.
    replies(3): >>13029677 #>>13029981 #>>13030007 #
    8. mememachine ◴[24 Nov 16 12:36 UTC] No.13029981{4}[source]▶
    based on his public appearances, no
    9. oneweekwonder ◴[24 Nov 16 12:43 UTC] No.13030007{4}[source]▶
    Maybe,

    But publicly denying your platform[0] did not affect the recent election; After research have confirmed prior to the election that Facebook have a fake news problem.

    Does not do his credibility any good.

    [0]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2016/11...

    10. dennisgorelik ◴[24 Nov 16 21:56 UTC] No.13033029[source]▶
    Zuck bragged about access, but there is no proof (or even indication) that he actually shared that info.
    11. lttlrck ◴[25 Nov 16 15:14 UTC] No.13037237{4}[source]▶
    Someone could certainly suffer anxiety and fear if their public messages were altered in the appropriate manner. And it could escalate.
    replies(1): >>13037279 #
    12. Dylan16807 ◴[25 Nov 16 15:18 UTC] No.13037279{5}[source]▶
    "in the appropriate manner"

    But if we focus on the manner that actually occurred, the only additional harm vs. a reply of "no u" is to reddit's reputation.