#modtalk irc.snoonet.com

<@spladug> everyone, we're in a meeting right now trying to discuss this issue. we understand where you're coming from, but please don't mistake our silence -- we're trying to make sure we present a consistent and logical front.

<@spladug> repeatedly pinging us with obnoxious messages is not in any way helpful.

<redtaboo> spladug~ thank you for saying something

<GuitarFreak> thank you spladug. looking forward to the outcome of this mess

<Triggs> Thanks spladug

<redtaboo> to be fair to those that were complete and utter silence in the faace of PI being left up isn't helpfuleither

<@spladug> you know that frequently we operate somewhat clandestinely during large shitstorms.

<@spladug> for better or worse

<sodypop> I think it's for the worse if nobody is going to at a very minimum remove personal information

<@spladug> but that is not the case.

<@spladug> will clarify momentarily.

<sodypop> I can't see how the predditor tumblr isn't personal information, but i'll wait to hear the arguments presented.

<solidwhetstone> this is the biggest shitstorm in recent memory

<solidwhetstone> well since /r/jailbait really

<solidwhetstone> only that situation was more cut and dry. now we have off-site stuff going

<MillenniumFalc0n> I think this is a bigger shitstorm, at least among the mods

<ManWithoutModem> Didn't that happen almost exactly a year ago?

*** tisiwhoshotjr has joined #modtalk

<solidwhetstone> sept 30 2011

<solidwhetstone> just a week and a half over a year

<Triggs> I think this is bigger too MillenniumFalc0n~ because it includes doxxing

<Triggs> jailbait was just drama cause of the content

<solidwhetstone> right

<solidwhetstone> and you have many players

<MillenniumFalc0n> Triggs: I think there's a lot more people upset with the admins over this than banning jailbait

<solidwhetstone> you have the creepshots guys, you have jezebel, you have srs, you have gawker

<redtaboo> I'm not upset with the admins, so much as I am confused.

<@chromakode> hey

<@kemitche> solidwhetstone: You are correct. Off-site, particularly with journalism/pseudo-journalism (with or without "integrity") is a much less clear line.

<solidwhetstone> hey chromakode

<@chromakode> I just wanted to say that we've been working pretty much nonstop since yesterday sorting through all this

<MillenniumFalc0n> redtaboo: I just disagree

<MillenniumFalc0n> upset might have been the wrong term

<solidwhetstone> lay it on us

<MillenniumFalc0n> chromakode: we appreciate it. It's just hard, being in the dark

<@chromakode> I understand

<MillenniumFalc0n> but we also know you run a business, and probably can't reveal too much of the internal discussion

<redtaboo> chromakode~ we do realize that, I promise. that predditors tumblr though, we feel should be taken care of. and yeah.. left in the dark is hard

<@spladug> for clarification, predditors.tumblr.com has been banned sitewide since the first second we became aware of it.

<@chromakode> we're still the same folks who worked day and night for you in the past. we haven't changed

<GuitarFreak> awesome

<@spladug> obviously, we can't remove it from tumblr, but we don't allow it linked on reddit.

<MillenniumFalc0n> Great to hear!

<redtaboo> ok, spladug the jezebel article links to it though

<@spladug> that's not exactly something we can fix, redtaboo

<redtaboo> you can remove that article

<MillenniumFalc0n> ...couldn't you ban that specific jezebelle article?

<solidwhetstone> is reddit going to be making a public statement any time soon?

<@kemitche> would we then have to remove articles that link to the jezebel article?

<sodypop> The Jezebel article also contains personal information other than the predditors site, right?

<solidwhetstone> either to the members or the public?

<@kemitche> and articles that link that articles that link to jezebel?

<GuitarFreak> why not just ban the whole site?

<ZeroShift> sodypop: Yes

<MobileFalc0n> As they are found, yes

<MobileFalc0n> You should require srs to remove the article when it is reported at least

<@spladug> deleting things that link to bad links is not sustainable. what if it were in a wikipedia article, should we ban that whole domain?

<redtaboo> ok, do you see where this gets us though? this puts us in the position of wondering what happens when it's one of us

<MobileFalc0n> I think you should require mods to remove links on a case by case basis. For instance, with the jezebelle article which clear links to pi

<MobileFalc0n> Most mods are removing it anyways, but you should step in with the few who dont

<MobileFalc0n> This is an example of malicious doxxing, designed to incite a witch hunt

<@chromakode> redtaboo, we understand. what can we do to help in such a case?

<redtaboo> enforce the removing of all PI

<ManWithoutModem> start by banning /r/srs and PI

<@spladug> redtaboo: we can't control things that aren't on reddit. they could just as easily dox any of us admins too. fundamentally, they will have to face the consequences of their own actions and we can't control that.

<solidwhetstone> agreed. ban /r/srs

<solidwhetstone> it threatens reddit

<ZeroShift> Second

<ManWithoutModem> third

<GuitarFreak> third

<redtaboo> spladug~ your identity is known, and you get paid for your job

<redtaboo> we don't

<solidwhetstone> banning srs would send a message. they go unchecked right now.

<redtaboo> unless and until I get paid, I need assuarnces that the admins have my back

*** MillenniumFalc0n has quit IRC: Ping timeout: 240 seconds

<@spladug> i understand redtaboo, but i don't understand how we're supposed to prevent people we have no control over from doing shitty stuff.

<ManWithoutModem> @admins-read my post on why srs needs to die: (Link: http://www.reddit.com/r/modtalk/comments/119fvw/am_i_the_only_one_who_thinks_this_is_an_affront/c6kra2j?context=3)http://www.reddit.com/r/modtalk/comments/119fvw/am_i_the_only_one_who_thinks_this_is_an_affront/c6kra2j?context=3

<@spladug> fox news could do this, nbc could do this, etc.

<sodypop> There's merit in banning SRS from the same viewpoint as how jailbait was banned. JB refused to remove CP and SRS refuses to remove personal information.

<redtaboo> spladug~ at least that is journalism (kinda) the tumblr isn't

<ManWithoutModem> you could ban the subreddits that these people find homes in

<ManWithoutModem> ban the users

<ManWithoutModem> things like that

<ManWithoutModem> *cough* srs

<solidwhetstone> srs is the haven the doxxers go to. it makes sense to ban it

<@spladug> sodypop: please report specific cases of personal information being upheld in SRS and we will deal with it.

<@spladug> (modmail)

<@kemitche> We don't ever want it to be one of you. But there's a limit to our power, and that limit is "stuff that's on reddit." We can't stop twitter or tumblr or anyone else from linking to jezebel. Pretending it doesn't exist doesn't protect you from having it happen to you

<@spladug> thank you kemitche for saying it much better than i was.

<redtaboo> spladug~ the tumblr could very well not have correct information. And, while, we have no idea inf PIMA's post about the assault is true, and I don't trust him, we all know that's a real possiblity with this

<solidwhetstone> @admins- is banning srs an option? you seem to not be addressing that option

<@chromakode> I agree with you redtaboo

<@spladug> redtaboo: i completely agree with you too. that's a shitty as hell situation. but as kemitche said, that tumblr could be linked on twitter or facebook and there's jack shit we can do about it.

<redtaboo> thanks, chromakode . I really do get you guys are in a hard position here

<@spladug> blocking it on reddit won't help and isn't sustainable

<ZeroShift> (Link: http://www.reddit.com/r/ShitRedditSays/comments/119q8v/project_panda_jezebel_runs_another_story_on/)http://www.reddit.com/r/ShitRedditSays/comments/119q8v/project_panda_jezebel_runs_another_story_on/ <== The jezebel article contains dox, and an SRS mod outright stated they would not remove it

<ManWithoutModem> Why has /r/srs not been banned when they have specifically stated that their goal is to take down reddit?

<sodypop> spladug, every link from the jezebel article contains personal information other than the predditor link.

<ManWithoutModem> >Our prime directive is that we will not intervene unless something attacks the structural integrity of the greater reddit community.

<ManWithoutModem> ^lol

<sodypop> (Link: http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/181hhoenjw7pppng/original.png)http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/181hhoenjw7pppng/original.png

<sodypop> that image is on the article

<ZeroShift> And SRS refuses to remove their link to it

<solidwhetstone> @admins- is banning srs an option? you seem to not be addressing that option

<MobileFalc0n> In irc an AA said they would not condemn nor remove the dox

<ManWithoutModem> @admins- is banning srs an option? you seem to not be addressing that option

<ZeroShift> Yet it's against the tos to do so

<MobileFalc0n> Solidwhetstone: even if it is, I feel like it's not something they're going to discuss in an irc channel

<solidwhetstone> @mobilefalc0n i don't care if they give me some bullshit political answer- even a nice 'we're considering all options' would be nice

<ZeroShift> ^

<@chromakode> of course we're considering all options, silly :P

<ZeroShift> I'm all for policital banter

<ManWithoutModem> So admins, would you say that SRS has not attacked the structural integrity of the greater reddit community?

<@chromakode> the reason we're not discussing SRS is because you are completely derailing this discussion with it.

<@chromakode> we are trying to address your very real concerns about being doxed and your PI on reddit

<@chromakode> they are separate issues

<solidwhetstone> i think we are unified in feeling like SRS is threatening the structural integrity

<@cupcake1713> +1

<@cupcake1713> (to chromakode)

<redtaboo> spladug~ thank you, I get that. But we (and all mods) are wiling to watch for that stuff too. THat's what we do, we help with that.

<redtaboo> yes, cupcake1713 +1 to chromakode there

<ManWithoutModem> They aren't separate issues when SRS are the people doing the doxxing. :P

<@cupcake1713> they are separate issues, ManWithoutModem

<redtaboo> I agree everyone, let's keep this about the PI for now, please

<@spladug> redtaboo: but reddit is not jezebel's only traffic source. the content will still be up. if you're against them doxxing, tell THEM.

<redtaboo> spladug~ I have

<@spladug> perfect

<redtaboo> also, I think our stand to block gawker traffic sends a clear message

<@cupcake1713> yeah, i guess a good thing to say here is this: for any content not hosted on reddit, contact those publications DIRECTLY

<redtaboo> cupcake1713~ ManWithoutModem got the tumblr link temporily removed

<@kemitche> redtaboo: From a personal standpoint, I have nothing against a subreddit deciding that certain domains are not allowed

<ManWithoutModem> So people hosting jailbait are allowed to post links to reddit with no repreccusions?

<@spladug> i'm with kemitche on that

<redtaboo> kemitche~ thanks, a lot of subreddits are doing it

<redtaboo> I think there would be a great message if the admins followed suit

<@spladug> you sure it wouldn't streisand the whole thing?

<@chromakode> isn't that giving gawker what it wants? attention?

<MobileFalc0n> Just so we're clear, posting dox is now acceptable as long as it's an off site link?

<solidwhetstone> the thing is already streisanded: (Link: http://news.yahoo.com/redditors-stand-gawker-protect-child-pornography-145854455.html)http://news.yahoo.com/redditors-stand-gawker-protect-child-pornography-145854455.html

<redtaboo> to gawker and other media that wish to irresponsibly post that information

<@spladug> MobileFalc0n: no, you're oversimplifying. as previously stated, the tumblr was banned from the moment it was first seen.

<ZeroShift> Let's not go putting words in people's mouths

<ManWithoutModem> Yeah, I was planning on doxxing Paradox on my blog and posting it to reddit. I was just wondering if that was alright.

<redtaboo> It would, temporarily, but in the long run it WOULD hurt their traffic

<MobileFalc0n> So as long as it's a link nested within another link?

<@spladug> MobileFalc0n: is it really that hard to understand that nothing is black and white and there needs to be some case-by-case review?

<MobileFalc0n> If I link to my blog, which links to Laurelai ED article, I'm not doxxing Laurelai?

<redtaboo> and other media would know that reddit doesn't stand for this

<ManWithoutModem> do you mind if I upload jailbait to my blog and post the links to reddit as well?

<GodOfAtheism> i keep seeing people blaming srs for the doxxing, but i haven't seen any evidence that they're actually responsibel

<MobileFalc0n> Spladug: sorry

<MobileFalc0n> Just frustrated

<redtaboo> GodOfAtheism~ we're not talking abut srs right now

<MobileFalc0n> I'll quit derailing now

<redtaboo> please don't muddy the conversation

<@kemitche> Links-to-links have to be much more case-by-case.

<@kemitche> If your blog uploads JB, you'll likely have repercussions beyond just reddit.

<ManWithoutModem> But what if it is legal?

<ManWithoutModem> And I'm just hosting it off site.

<@kemitche> The internet is a series of links

<ManWithoutModem> Reddit wouldn't really seem to have a problem with that.

<@cupcake1713> i think i'm having a hard time following your logic, ManWithoutModem... if you're posting something legal then why would we have a problem?

<ManWithoutModem> lol

<solidwhetstone> @kemitche no it's a series of tubes ;)

<@kemitche> and those links form quite a big web

<ManWithoutModem> So I have the OK from the admins to post jailbait from my blog?

<ManWithoutModem> To reddit

<solidwhetstone> don't forget creep shots

<redtaboo> ManWithoutModem~ c'mon

<@kemitche> so no, we're not going to flat-out ban all things that have a link chain that eventually touches something rule-breaking

<@cupcake1713> guys, seriously

<redtaboo> we need to try to havea real coonversation here

<redtaboo> regardless of my typing skills

<sodypop> The jezebel article contains personal information directly in it.

<ZeroShift> correct

<@kemitche> sodypop: Many actual news articles contain full names

<sodypop> "including a Redditor she has identified as Jeremy Wayne Lohr,"

<solidwhetstone> so i think we need to define doxxing

<ZeroShift> It has a redditor's username, real name and picture

<solidwhetstone> because i'm starting to see that maybe the admins and mods have different definitions

<ManWithoutModem> Do they contain home addresses, phone numbers, etc?

<redtaboo> many news organiztions use real sources, not a tumblr blog

<MobileFalc0n> Directly connected to Reddit accounts kemitche?

<solidwhetstone> @kemitche does reddit consider doxxing legit if it's off site?

<solidwhetstone> or is doxxing only acknowledged when it's on site?

<MobileFalc0n> The jezebelle article definitely violates reddit.com/rules

<ManWithoutModem> *crickets*

<sodypop> That user is no celebrity or public figure.

<@kemitche> If you're going to twist every thing I say, then yes, you'll get crickets.

<solidwhetstone> @kemitche- did i twist anything?

<solidwhetstone> i can rephrase my question

<@chromakode> a few people have to leave for lunch

<@kemitche> You're all approaching it from "We don't like this jezebel article and how can I apply the prior admin statements/rules to get it removed"

<sodypop> I feel at this point our conversation is not beingvery constructive.

<redtaboo> solidwhetstone~ yeah, kinda... it seems like some of us are trying to trap the admins into saying something instead of listening to them

<@chromakode> sodypop, agreed.

<redtaboo> sodypop~ agree

<@chromakode> we're trying to listen to you, too.

<solidwhetstone> i'm not trying to trap...i hope it hasn't seemed like i was

<@chromakode> this is complicated *because* it's a nuanced issue

<@kemitche> Whereas we have to try to approach it from "What are the general guidelines we can apply or modify to foster the desired community behavior"

<@kemitche> So it's very frustrating on our side to have any generalized guidelines we make get thrown back in our face

<@chromakode> and without a doubt, we are on your side.

<sodypop> The problem I have is that if linking a redditor's real name and picture to their account is allowed, then I don't feel protected with a reasonable amount of anonymity.

<sodypop> I've always viewed anonymity as one of the core values of reddit.

<@chromakode> I do too

<ManWithoutModem> So when I go to (Link: http://reddit.com/rules)http://reddit.com/rules and see that rule #3 is "Don't post personal information," yet I see personal information that the admins have left up, I along with many others, get worried.

<Rswany> is r/defaultmods private?

<redtaboo> yes

<Rswany> because karmanauts post their was leaked

<Rswany> (Link: http://i46.tinypic.com/291z79l.jpg)http://i46.tinypic.com/291z79l.jpg

<redtaboo> of course it was

<Rswany> and whoever did used tinypic

<Rswany> eww

<solidwhetstone> lol

<solidwhetstone> @chromakode- i'm not trying to trap or anything- i just want to get clarification on only one question

<@chromakode> yes?

<solidwhetstone> does reddit recognize off-site doxxing as doxxing? or does reddit only recognize on-site doxxing?

<ManWithoutModem> ^

<@chromakode> I don't think that question makes sense

<@chromakode> can you please be more specific?

<solidwhetstone> ok let me rephrase it

<@kemitche> solidwhetstone: you're asking for a black-and-white answer to a very grayscale question.

<solidwhetstone> i'm not sure how to reword that lol. i guess what i mean is- if the mods feel like- for example- srs is fostering an environment that encourages off-site doxxing, does reddit consider that?

<@chromakode> also, I'd like to turn this question around to you. put yourself in our shoes. being a mod isn't very different from being an admin, particularly in responding to community issues in this respect, as kemitche said, we approach this from wanting to foster safe and constructive interaction on reddit

<@chromakode> I thought doxxing was a behavior, not a type of content?

<@chromakode> personal information also varies depending on the person

<@chromakode> we work really hard at all hours of the night to protect peoples' personal information on reddit

<solidwhetstone> right

<@chromakode> but how can we better protect people from themselves or the rest of the internet?

<@kemitche> The "black" end is: A link to a site that encourages users to look up /compile information on a reddit user and harass them. The "white" end is a respectable news source saying that such a dox happened, but without supplying any links or names or information (but what news source doesn't provide information?)

<sodypop> A redditor who is not a public figure or celebrity has their real name, photo, and username posted on a site. The site is then linked on reddit. Is that considered posting personal information?

<redtaboo> it is a behavior, for sure, and right now there is a 'this is bad, don't do it' *wink* thing going on with doxxing in certain subreddits

<solidwhetstone> ^

<ZeroShift> ^^

<redtaboo> That is the precise behaviour that should be stomped out

<@chromakode> we actively investigate all activity of that kind

<@chromakode> you may not see it, because we have to be somewhat quiet about it.

<ManWithoutModem> Then why is the jezebelle article still up?

<ManWithoutModem> has the article not been investigated enough?

<ManWithoutModem> You've had around 18 hours or so.

<sodypop> Please, let's not try to assign blame

<@chromakode> I'm here because I want to talk to you

<ManWithoutModem> I want to talk too

<sodypop> Yes, it is frustrating we've been kept in the dark for so long. We also need to keep our heads on straight if we are to discuss this openly.

<redtaboo> ^^^^^

<@chromakode> when you make me accountable for reddit's actions, it makes it hard for me to actually communicate with you and understand your position, because I'm not wholly responsible for what reddit does

<ManWithoutModem> I understand that

<solidwhetstone> @chromakode- is there something we as mods can do- and perhaps that dacvak can do now as the new community manager to help us all be more on the same page as soon as shitstorms happen?

<solidwhetstone> like an internal press release sort of thing

<@chromakode> I think the best thing we can do is get down to the specific of where you feel that action should be taken, and I'll make sure that we have a chance to discuss that

<@kemitche> One key difference to understand is that there is a difference between a call to action (go find information / harass this person) and information that's already out there. Once information has been compiled and posted *somewhere* there's less we can do to limit its spread

*** MillenniumFalc0n has joined #modtalk

<@chromakode> solidwhetstone, I'd love to improve our communication, but please understand that we already keep you in the loop as quickly as we reasonably can

<MillenniumFalc0n> kemitche: precedent says that's not the case though. For instance, I know several users have been dhadowbanned for linking to Laurelai's ED article, which is definitely already compiled and posted pi

<@kemitche> I'm sure you can all recall a time where you had to remove a popular thread from your subreddit, and immediately saw a "WTF happened to post X?" get popular in your subreddit and/or others

*** MobileFalc0n has quit IRC: Quit: desktop

<solidwhetstone> i think there were a lot of concerns that the admins have been pretty silent. just my perception

<sodypop> kemitche, personal information doesn't cease being personal just because it becomes publicly available.

<@chromakode> solidwhetstone, understood, but this is a particularly hairy issue and we'd really appreciate the benefit of the doubt from you

<ZeroShift> sodypop: ^

<solidwhetstone> you definitely have the benefit of the doubt from me personally

<solidwhetstone> i was speaking more of my observation

<@chromakode> gotcha.

<@chromakode> sodypop, agreed, but what are we to do about that?

<@chromakode> sodypop, what would you do?

<@kemitche> sodypop: right. the goal is to minimize the spread. So should we Streisand it? Is that the most effective way to handle it? These are some of the things we have to consider.

<ZeroShift> Fair enough

<sodypop> chromakode, I would remove the Jezebel article that contains personal information (real name and photo) that has been linked to a reddit user's account.

<@chromakode> actually, there's a pretty good analogy to be taken here

<@chromakode> mods have limited ability to prevent people from posting bad stuff in their subreddit, but they can't stop it from propagating outside of their subreddit walls

<@chromakode> as admins, we have the ability to remove bad stuff from reddit, but we can't prevent the rest of the internet from doing so

<solidwhetstone> that's why i created /r/republicofban :)

<@chromakode> as mods, what do you do in a situation like this in your community?

<@chromakode> and please keep in mind that this is a nuanced question

<MillenniumFalc0n> chromakode: all we're asking you to do is not allow it to be posted on reddit

<sodypop> I remove the personal information.

<GuitarFreak> as long as it stays off of reddit, i don't think there would be a problem

<MillenniumFalc0n> ^

<MillenniumFalc0n> which is what we do in our subs

<redtaboo> chromakode~ I approach the other subreddits as a mod, and talk to them.

<sodypop> Or the links to personal information on reddit, to be specific.

<GuitarFreak> i know there's nothing you can really do about stuff outside of reddit, but keeping it off of reddit is a start

<ZeroShift> But in certain cases, some subs refuse to remove link to PI

<@chromakode> gotcha

<solidwhetstone> @chromakode i think we're all on the same page that nothing can be done about off-site stuff

<solidwhetstone> i _think_

<@chromakode> yeah :(

<@chromakode> I think kemitche is right on about getting to the point of the personal information rule

<@chromakode> we definitely have the streissand effect to contend with here

<@chromakode> why do we remove personal info from reddit in the first place?

<MillenniumFalc0n> chromakode: isn't most dox linked to on reddit already compiled?

<ZeroShift> To protect people's info and identities

<redtaboo> to protect users from with hunts IRL

<MillenniumFalc0n> ^

<redtaboo> *witch

<ZeroShift> Some people wish to remain anonymous

<@chromakode> right

<@chromakode> personally, I remained completely anonymous on the internet until I was 18. I totally get that

<@chromakode> MillenniumFalc0n, a significant problem is that reddit can be a great tool for compiling and organizing witchhunts

<@chromakode> it's the magnifying glass you can use to focus the sun

<sodypop> I don't think the streisand effect should paralyze you from removing content that breaks the rules.

<ZeroShift> ^

<@chromakode> totally, I understand that

<@kemitche> sodypop: the spirit of the rule is to prevent witch hunts and such

*** aphoenix has quit IRC: Ping timeout: 240 seconds

<MillenniumFalc0n> chromakode: I'm not trying to derail, I'm just trying to find out how you would apply this. Based on this interpretation of doxxing, it seems like I should no longer remove/report, for instance, people who link to Laurelai's ED article (I use her as an example b/c that is the dox problem I deal with most often)

<MillenniumFalc0n> it's already compiled and posted. It's not new

<MillenniumFalc0n> I still remove it though, b/c it is linking a redditor with real life info

*** aphoenix has joined #modtalk

<@chromakode> MillenniumFalc0n, I don't think it would be fair to discuss changes in your action right now. I'm mostly trying to explore the issue with you and help us understand your viewpoint, and for you to understand why we're taking some time to figure out how to respond to this.

*** Relic2279 has joined #modtalk

<sodypop> Wouldn't you consider the jezebel article as encouraging obvious vigilantism?

<ManWithoutModem> question-when will you make a post to the mods and/or a post to the general public

<sodypop> Something titled, "How to Shut Down Reddit’s CreepShots Once and for All: Name Names"

<sodypop> That's a call for a witch hunt.

<@chromakode> ManWithoutModem, I can't personally answer that question, but we'll communicate with you as much as we can

<@chromakode> sodypop, I agree

*** a_redditor has joined #modtalk

<@kemitche> sodypop: the article would be encouraging vigilante-ism even if it were a description of events without those photos.

<ManWithoutModem> agreed sodypop

<a_redditor> ooh! admins finally

<sodypop> It encourages vigilantism and contains personal information, so isn't that enough to be removed?

<@kemitche> And I don't think i'd agree that an article that says "vigilante-ism happened" is against the rules. Much like an article about the jailbait events is not against the rules.

<ManWithoutModem> what if the article linked to jailbait, just like the vigilante-ism article links to dox?

<ManWithoutModem> do you see what I'm getting at?

<@kemitche> That's not a precise comparison

<sodypop> We should be careful with anologies to jailbait (yes i made one earlier).

<sodypop> CP, or sexualizing minors is illegal. "Doxxing" isn't illegal

<@kemitche> "What If Anderson Cooper showed jailbait" is not a realistic analogy

<@chromakode> also keep in mind that the jezebel article is designed to be as dramagenic and gray area as possible

<aphoenix> Doxxing isn't illegal, but then again, neither are the Creepshots things.

<ManWithoutModem> or........nevermind

<@chromakode> so, back in our shoes for a moment

<@chromakode> doxing gets posted to an external site

<@chromakode> we remove said site

<@chromakode> attention-grabbing news sites start to report that doxing happens

<@chromakode> what can we do that is constructive then?

<@kemitche> it's 1 pm here and I haven't eaten yet. I'm happy to discuss more later, but I do also have a bunch of other stuff I'm supposed to be getting done.

<Rswany> Go feast

<ManWithoutModem> remove every single thing that discusses the doxxing

<solidwhetstone> thank you for coming by @kemitche

<redtaboo> kemitche~ thank you, please have some pie for lunch!

<MillenniumFalc0n> ^

<sodypop> The news site doxes a redditor itself, it does not only contain a link to the preddito tumblr, but personal name and photo linked to a reddit user in the article.

<@chromakode> drama distracts us massively from improving the site because we all care about it

<@kemitche> redtaboo: I think I will :) solidwhetstone: You're welcome. I'm sorry about the semi-long silence.

<ManWithoutModem> I'm going to sleep since I haven't slept in forever, I hope to come back to some good questions and some good answers in like 9 hours

<ManWithoutModem> keep it going ladies and gents ;)

<@chromakode> sodypop, totally true

<ManWithoutModem> and to the admins-thanks for coming out of the woodwork to talk to us

<aphoenix> mods: I think that just saying "we see what's happening - we care - we don't have much we could do" is enough for me.

*** kemitche is now known as kemitche_afk

<solidwhetstone> since it seems like things are wrapping up- just a quick thank you to the admins for swinging by. i think we are all on the same page that we all love reddit and don't want it to fall apart.

<aphoenix> Personally, I really appreciate that.

<@chromakode> rest well ManWithoutModem

<@chromakode> of course, solidwhetstone, discussions like this improve reddit too

<@chromakode> let's try to keep level headed and not immediately leap to reddit falling apart due to some drama over which posts were removed

*** MobileFalc0n has joined #modtalk

<solidwhetstone> well digg has proven that one event can cause a social site to fall apart

<sodypop> So, personal information is on the jezebel article directly. It's also a call for a witch hunt. We've agreed on that so far, right?

<@chromakode> and we get to prove that we're stronger than that

<@chromakode> these sort of issues aren't going to stop happening. we're going to have more gray areas and controversial issues the more the site grows

<@cupcake1713> digg fell apart for totally different reasons, solidwhetstone

<sodypop> And so I understand this, the reasoning for not removing the ejzebel article is because fear of a streisand effect?

<@chromakode> sodypop, yeah, I hear ya

<@chromakode> sodypop, I'm not saying that's the reasoning

<@chromakode> I want to hear your opinion on whether removing it is constructive to reddit

<solidwhetstone> @cupcake- i know- but a big part of what makes reddit successful is moderation. and if the mods lose faith in the system, they will leave. if they leave, the quality will decrease.

<sodypop> I feel it is destructive to the trust between reddit user/mod and the admins.

<sodypop> We need a reasonable amount of assurance that if our personal details are spread across reddit, that some action will be taken.

<ZeroShift> ^

<DEADB33F> probably not constructive, once the removal becomes common knowledge you'll soon have your attention-grabbing news sites starting to report that "reddit admins are actively protecting child pornographers."

<MillenniumFalc0n> As someone who has been threatened with doxxing several times already, I'm a little disheartened.

<DEADB33F> and other such ridiculous headlines.

<MillenniumFalc0n> those headlines already exists

<MillenniumFalc0n> People that hate reddit (SRS) are going to hate reddit no matter what we do

<DEADB33F> Yeah, but not that the admins are directly involved.

<@chromakode> sodypop, I completely, 100% get that, and feel strongly about that

<MillenniumFalc0n> It says "reddit is protecting child pornographers"

<DEADB33F> Which is totally different.

<MillenniumFalc0n> definitely implying that the site as a whole is doing it

<redtaboo> chromakode~ I get what you guys are saying about it being already offsite and you can't control that

<MillenniumFalc0n> I wish there was an easy solution guys, but I appreciate y'all coming out to discuss with us

<redtaboo> but, really.. who else but reddit is going to care?

<redtaboo> so, if it's not on reddit then the proliferation and possiblity of witch hunt goes way down

<@chromakode> MillenniumFalc0n, there'll almost never be an easy solution

<MillenniumFalc0n> chromakode: comes with the territory.You shouldn't have let Reddit get so popular :P

<redtaboo> And, with that, I don't necessarily mean the post that's up now (though this is why I want it removed)

<@chromakode> redtaboo, gotcha

<@chromakode> before we debate that, I'd like to say first off that I think what you guys are doing is fantastic and that this is the sort of relationship I'd like to see between the admins and the mods (but with less drama, please)

<redtaboo> completely agree with you

<sodypop> It's great that we're even having this convo, albeit later than we as mods would have liked.

<@chromakode> I totally like to see the mods politely and constructively calling us out when necessary

<sodypop> I still am confused at the reason for not removing links to the jezebel article, however.

<@chromakode> sodypop, it's unfortunate, but there's not much we can do about that :(

<@chromakode> I hear that sodypop

<sodypop> chromakode, not to mention awful timing with the Internet 2012 bus tour leaving you short a GM.

<@chromakode> totally

<GuitarFreak> and on dac's second "official" day too

<@cupcake1713> haha sodypop, i was on the bus tour and just got back yesterday

<@chromakode> trying to figure out how to discuss that when there's not much I can do about removing or not removing that specific link

<@cupcake1713> and came back to this

<sodypop> cupcake1713, welcome back :)

<redtaboo> ^^^^

<@cupcake1713> heh thanks

<redtaboo> sorry we jumped on you earlier

<@chromakode> yeah seriously guys

<@chromakode> if there's one additional thing I'd like to see come out of this, it's figuring out how to approach a similar situation in the future better

<@chromakode> not to derail from the discussion we're having right now, though

<@cupcake1713> it's okay redtaboo, i understand how confusing/stressful/etc this must have been for everyone

<GuitarFreak> it was rather funny that you joined, everyone jumped on you, and you left 2 minutes later

<@cupcake1713> :)

<@chromakode> so, sodypop, redtaboo: regarding the jezebel article

<@chromakode> I agree with you that its title and positioning evokes vigilanteism

*** soupyhands has joined #modtalk

<@chromakode> and that it contains screenshots from the primary doxing source containing PI

<@chromakode> those are objective facts

<GuitarFreak> chromakode: a bit off topic, but at some point, would you be willing to discuss SRS with us?

<@chromakode> GuitarFreak, I'm don't think I'm the right person to do so,

<GuitarFreak> alright

<@chromakode> it looks like Dac responded to some comments about it in the recent blog post comment thread

<redtaboo> chromakode~ would it be fair to say that the original doxxing source is not a valid source for anything?

<@chromakode> redtaboo, that it could be false info, you mean?

<redtaboo> yes

<@chromakode> totally, this is the internet

<redtaboo> okay, knowing all this I can't see what good can come from leaving it up. only bad

<@chromakode> the jezebel article?

<redtaboo> ys

<redtaboo> *yes

<@chromakode> and what good would removing it do? prevent more people from seeing that information as a result of reddit?

<redtaboo> yes, as I said most of the interest in that is from reddit

<@chromakode> I think we can make an argument independent from where the interest is coming from

<aphoenix> chromakode - i follow you. I'm looking at a pros / cons list. I can't really see what removing it has in the "pros" list. Other than sticking to one's guns re: personal information...

<redtaboo> I'm quite sure many 2xcers have no idea what is going on

<redtaboo> Other than sticking to one's guns re: personal information... <--- this (downvote me for not contributing)

<MillenniumFalc0n> hmm. Saydrah quitting reddit?

<redtaboo> MillenniumFalc0n~ wrong window?

<mirashii> FWIW, there have been incidents in the past where personal information was being spread on other sites (like youtube), and was spreading out of control rapidly, and admins and mods together stuck their grounds to keep it off

<soupyhands> silly redtaboo you cant downvote on irc

<redtaboo> :P

<MillenniumFalc0n> redtaboo: whoops, should have gone in reddiction

<mirashii> To me, the argument that "it's popular enough anyways, what more harm is a link from reddit going to do" is a slippery slope

<MillenniumFalc0n> not that anyone uses it

<redtaboo> mirashii~ thank you, that is very well said

<@chromakode> mirashii, I agree.

<GuitarFreak> mirashii: /r/videos is a good example of this. we deal with witch hunts more often than most subreddits it seems

<@chromakode> mirashii, that's not the angle I intend to approach this from

<mirashii> It's a particularly slippery slope in the case that what if someone's PI starts on reddit, gets popular on the rest of the internet, and we allow it to stay on reddit because "Well, it's out there anyways". Which is somewhat close to this but not exactly this situation

*** Attunement has quit IRC: Quit: Gone to do awesome stuff

<@chromakode> what I'm trying to do is narrow down our subjective interpretations of reddit PI rule and the jezebel page (which seems to be the focus of this disagreement) so that I can better communicate your points of view in our internal discussions

<@chromakode> admins take removing links really seriously, because it's something we're under intense scrutiny for

<mirashii> (I'm jumping in kinda late, I haven't gotten the change to read the backlog other than skimming and seeing one line that seemed like the argument I just quoted from an @ somewhere, so forgive me if you've had this conversation already)

<solidwhetstone> i think a good filter for removing links might be 'is this content going to hurt the reddit community? will removing this link protect anyone from doxxing?'

<@chromakode> solidwhetstone, totally

<@chromakode> that's why I'm asking you those questions

<solidwhetstone> i think a lot of people in this room at least feel like the jezebel article is hurting the reddit community

<solidwhetstone> not because it's informational or just a news article

<@chromakode> but because it contains PI and encourages further vigilanteism?

<solidwhetstone> yes.

<@chromakode> I think we're on the same page here

<redtaboo> chromakode~ yes. If this was an article where someone was areested, like the teacher was, that would be different

<Rswany> lol, SoInvictus has been helping feed that Atlantic Wire writer "information"

<sodypop> I feel that the attitude is that "the damage has already been done, so why remove it?"

<redtaboo> that /is/ news, and verifiable. This is neither

<sodypop> I cannot agree to enforcing the PI rule only for damage control reasons.

<solidwhetstone> on a side note- predditors is locked

<@chromakode> sodypop, redtaboo: both excellent points

<@chromakode> now I think you understand the pickle we're in, and vice versa

<@chromakode> besides that specific jezebel link, what are your concerns regarding doxxing in general?

<solidwhetstone> that the philosophy of doxxing is practically embraced by srs.

<redtaboo> my biggest concern is that the doxxing is often incorrect, and the vigilantism is often over done for the 'crime'

<GuitarFreak> one of my concerns is having the potential to seriously hinder a person's life because of some stupid little thing

<@chromakode> totally

<@chromakode> those are huge problems on the internet in general

<@chromakode> what can we as mods and admins do better?

<solidwhetstone> break up groups that are fostering it

<GuitarFreak> this is especially true for me because I would like to do stuff in the security field and possibly government related, so i don't want stupid shit like that weighing in on anything

<redtaboo> educate ourselves and users about keeping our personal personal... but, reddit works so well because people share their lives

<@chromakode> redtaboo, totally agreed on education

<sodypop> My concern is with trust and assurance that my own details would be removed if they were spread across reddit.

<redtaboo> GuitarFreak~ I'm currently seeking employment, if something were to happen to me now and were googleable I would be screwed

<redtaboo> sodypop~ I agree with you

<GuitarFreak> sodypop: agreed

<sodypop> I feel badly for the redditors that have had their details spread. There are subreddits that refuse to remove links to their PI.

<redtaboo> I feel badly that some of that information may be incorrect

<redtaboo> and peoples jobs were called

<sodypop> I think even if this is a grey area of the PI policy, the benefit of the doubt has been eclipsed by the call for a witch hunt.

<@chromakode> I hear ya

<@chromakode> and I really appreciate that you're thinking so deeply on this

<sodypop> I would strongly disagree that this is a grey area though, names in the text of the article, pictures of the user, and links to more PI./

<@chromakode> sodypop, I think you've made that case fairly.

<@chromakode> and I will make sure that point is made

<sodypop> Thank you, it means alot that you are here listening even if I am a broken record.

<solidwhetstone> hey even a broken record is right once every 360 degrees

<@chromakode> :)

*** kemitche_afk is now known as kemitche

<@chromakode> I'm sorry we weren't talking with you yesterday

<@chromakode> we really don't want to create drama by getting details wrong or making promises we can't keep

<sodypop> As the reddit team grows I'm sure getting everyone on the same page is difficult.

<@chromakode> so sometimes we have to resolve often-parallel debates internally before we can communicate with you

<@chromakode> sodypop, that's one reason we tend to stay small

<solidwhetstone> @chromakode you don't have to actually announce anything ya know. you could just come into threads about it and say 'we're working on it' and that' sit

<redtaboo> solidwhetstone~ to be fair HP did at one point

<@chromakode> solidwhetstone, true, but sometimes we're already up to our eyeballs in it. I think you understand

<redtaboo> but

<@cupcake1713> solidwhetstone: would that really have changed anything?

<solidwhetstone> @cupcake wouldn't have changed the issue, but we're having a meta discussion about communication right now

<sodypop> I think it would have eased a lot of the speculation and concerns from users and mods.

<solidwhetstone> so yes, it does change some things

<solidwhetstone> it's the perception the mods and users have

<@cupcake1713> but if huey already did it, and i was met with all of those comments literally seconds after i logged in... wouldn't that show that saying "we're working on it" wouldn't have changed anything?

<redtaboo> cupcake1713~ HP did, however we asked him very specific questions about PI eing left up

<@kemitche> I do have to say the excessive speculation is a bit harmful. There's no need to jump into some conspiracy just because it takes longer than 2 hours for one of us to make a statement :-\

<redtaboo> then were met with silence, I even emailed him & dac and PM'd reddit.com

<sodypop> Okay, we can't argue what's happened already, but we can learn from it as both mods and admins.

<@chromakode> +1

<redtaboo> sodypop~ good point

* @kemitche has definitely learned something

<@kemitche> Did not have pie though

<@kemitche> :(

<redtaboo> :(

<solidwhetstone> dammit!

* redtaboo sends kemitche pie

<@chromakode> I haven't eaten anything since I've woken up

<solidwhetstone> someone create /r/randomactsofpie

<sodypop> I do feel that we as mods may not have gone apeshit with banning gawker domains if the PI in those jezebel articles weren't spreading like wild fire.

<redtaboo> chromakode~ go eat ice cream

<@chromakode> trying to get HP in here. is it possible for someone to invite him?

* @kemitche hands chromakode the baton

<redtaboo> I can

<@kemitche> go eat, chromakode

<redtaboo> is he reg'd as hueypriest?

<sodypop> So I think with that in mind, being cautious of the streisand effect caused by removing the jezebel links, actually caused us as mods to streisand the issue further by banning gawker.... if that makes any sense

<@chromakode> redtaboo, not sure if he is registered. going to try to get him on, and then perhaps you could /invite him?

<redtaboo> I'll do my best

<redtaboo> have him PM me

<redtaboo> i think he has to be registered for the invite to work

*** cupcake1713 has quit IRC: Quit: Leaving.

*** hueypriest has joined #modtalk

<solidwhetstone> bienvenidos

<hueypriest> howdy

<redtaboo> welcome

<solidwhetstone> how's the bus?

<hueypriest> i've been in BFE kentucky. not much internets there

*** GuitarFreak is now known as GuitarFreak027

<hueypriest> but bus is good. trip wrapping up

*** GuitarFreak has joined #modtalk

<solidwhetstone> nothing like a good old fashioned shitstorm to wrap it up with

*** GuitarFreak is now known as GuitarFreak|Linux

<hueypriest> so, i'm basically caught up on everything. want to answer any questions I can, etc.

<solidwhetstone> boxers or briefs?

<soupyhands> apple or android

<hueypriest> solidwhetstone, we looked at the print out of your face everyday. thanks (i think)

<mirashii> I'm jsut coming back in, but I have one suggestion I'd like to leave before I pop back out again

<solidwhetstone> @hueypriest i pity you haha

<mirashii> I would suggest a "remove first, reinstate later" policy. Leaving the information up while you decide internally what to do with it makes it so that by the time a decision has been made, the damage has already been done.

<hueypriest> i haven't done laundry in a long time, so wearing what was available for sale at the truck stop. apple.

<soupyhands> yay

<solidwhetstone> booo

<soupyhands> ^^^silence you

<solidwhetstone> :]

<soupyhands> hueypriest what do you think of PIMA allegations that admins were involved in VA's doxxing

<solidwhetstone> hp i think chromakode and kemitche took the brunt of the discussion

<redtaboo> soupyhands~ I think that's silly and not worth anything

<GuitarFreak027> hueypriest: is anything going to be done regarding SRS and the jezebel article/doxing?

<redtaboo> PIMA is a trol and a shit-stirrer

<hueypriest> mirashii that sounds reasonable. we tend to err on the side of banning in general

<@chromakode> soupyhands, I think it should go without saying that I had absolutely no hand in any personal info being disclosed

<mirashii> And some of the mods have shown yesterday/today that while waiting for an official response, they will attempt to take matters into their own hands, even when it was pointed out that it may often just take you guys some time in this channel. And honestly, I think the response by the mods when the admins didn't step in spiralled it further out of control.

<hueypriest> soupyhands, there's absolutely no truth to that

<soupyhands> thanks for clarifying that

<soupyhands> i dont believe a word that comes out of PIMAs mouth but his post saw some traffic there

<soupyhands> and once that kind of allegation is out there its hard to disprove

<@chromakode> or prove

<soupyhands> i think VA wanted one last chance at painting the admins as bad guys

<solidwhetstone> i talked to VA and he hasn't a clue who doxxed him.

<solidwhetstone> but when he initially got contacted by the gawker guy- he told me he did suspect the admins

*** DerTauman is now known as MooseTauman

<@chromakode> soupyhands, VA himself apologized for implicating Steve and I. he didn't intend it

<solidwhetstone> he has later just said he has no clue

<soupyhands> chromakode did PIMA ever retract his allegation though?

<redtaboo> chromakode~ he also did so in modtalk and told everyone they are allowed to repeat that

<hueypriest> guitarfreak027 even though i think it's irresponsible it's an article. different than users posting it in comments or link to pastebin/tumblr

<solidwhetstone> fyi- r/movies will be quietly blocking all the gawker sites probably today

<solidwhetstone> but will not be making an announcement

*** airmandan|work has joined #modtalk

<mirashii> hueypriest: if you could, would you guys internally in the coming days have an internal discussion on that, and decide whether you think as a whole it's a good policy? Having a public, unified stance on the matter will help know whether or not to escalate it to the admins when a post which my be borderline is being sanctioned by a subreddit's moderators. I think that the people who were so upset (I'm not one of them, just a bystander trying to hel

<sodypop> I'm not sure defending it as journalism flies given Gawkers history of creating reddit-bombs of drama for their own profit.

<airmandan|work> oh dear

<airmandan|work> what have I missed

<solidwhetstone> lol

<DEADB33F> I'd say that removing/censoring the article will harm the admin's credibility more than the article is currently hurting the community.

<MillenniumFalc0n> how?

<airmandan|work> i go to one doctor appointment and that's the time we get an admin response

<MillenniumFalc0n> how would removing an article including dox be at all inconsistent with previous action DEADB33f

<DEADB33F> It'll make it easy for unscrupulous types to paint the picture that the admins are condoning the actions of those being exposed.

<MillenniumFalc0n> better to condone doxxing?

<DEADB33F> Which is totally the wrong signal to send out.

<hueypriest> mirashii ok. usually if something is borderline we usually leave it to subreddit mods, but please escalate anything borderline to admins.

<mirashii> DEADB33F: I think that's easy to say now that things have blown up to the stage they are in, but if the articles had been taken down earlier and the incident hadn't escalated to the multiday event that it is, the story may be different

<mirashii> It's one of those things where taking it down can never help their credibility, because it was taken down and so we have to give our silent thanks

<hueypriest> sodypop i agree with your sentiment, but it's still in that category. even if it's poorly done

<DEADB33F> That may be true, but the current discussion is whether they should now be taken down.

<MillenniumFalc0n> hueypriest: we've all reported the jezebelle article to the SRS mods and to you guys, but it's still up

<MillenniumFalc0n> and it definitely includes dox

<mirashii> DEADB33F: I'm in parallel more worried about going forward

<mirashii> :)

<redtaboo> hueypriest~ I'm not sure how it can be anywhere near journalism when the source is a tumblr blog

<mirashii> But I need to run. I look forward to coming back to this at a later date.

<sodypop> So any site willing to post personal information is okay to link on reddit? That leaves open blogs, tabloids, and other questionable sites an avenue to post PI with no consequence.

<redtaboo> thanks for piping in mirashii

*** RestoreFear has joined #modtalk

<MobileFalc0n> People have been shadow banned for linking less egregious personal info than this

<sodypop> With multiple blog posts pounding it into our heads that posting PI, or links to PI, is not acceptible, this becomes very confusing.

<hueypriest> redtaboo, it has a byline. it's a news article. I agree it is a difficult case.

<airmandan|work> gawker is not news

<airmandan|work> period

<airmandan|work> end of story

<soupyhands> hueypriest, offtopic a little bit but while you are here, can I ask if /r/repportthespammers is still monitored?

<redtaboo> hueypriest~ shouldn't we be better than that? We can read the 'article' see that the source is bad and the 'article is harmful

<MillenniumFalc0n> hueypriest: anyone can create a blog with a byline

<DEADB33F> It would be credible if it had checked its sources and approached those mentioned in the article for comment, either to confirm or deny that they're the person mentioned in the blog post.

<DEADB33F> Without that sorce checking it's just gossip mongering.

<DEADB33F> source*

<redtaboo> as I sad before, the articles about the teacher being arrested were different, that was verifiable

<hueypriest> millenniumfalc0n we are aware of this. it's a judgement call. we make many of them with borderline PI cases

<airmandan|work> gawker is the internet version of the National Enquirer

<airmandan|work> with less credibility and originality

<hueypriest> soupyhands, yes it is being monitored

<MillenniumFalc0n> how is this borderline?

<soupyhands> thanks

<MillenniumFalc0n> linking multiple reddit accounts with names, facebooks, addresses, phone numbers

<MillenniumFalc0n> even workplaces!

<airmandan|work> and criminal records

<airmandan|work> those too

<sodypop> We as users and moderators need to be able to trust that if our PI gets spread, that it will be removed within a reasonable amount of time.

<MillenniumFalc0n> I'm sorry if I'm coming off as confrontational, but as someone who has been threatened with doxxing, I"m just very nervous right now

<hueypriest> we do that, and we all agree about 99% of the personal info that gets posted to reddit

<sodypop> We need assurances that our anonymity is going to be protected, at least within the site itself.

<airmandan|work> laurelai gets people shadowbanned for people linking *to a google search for her username*

<airmandan|work> but somehow predditors is...a-ok?

<MillenniumFalc0n> airmandan: I brought that up earlier

<hueypriest> milleniumfalc0n, I understand why you are nervous. it's a serious issue and we take it seriously as a company. i take it seriously personally as well.

<sodypop> The jezebel article contains a real name and picture linking the user to their username. It is also an instructional for witch hunts. This in my eyes is not borderline at all.

<MillenniumFalc0n> she has had people shadow banned repeatedly for linking to far less egregious personal info

<MillenniumFalc0n> thanks hueypriest, we appreciate you listening to our concerns and working on this

<hueypriest> milleniumFalc0n yes we discussed those laurelai examples as well

*** GuitarFreak027 has quit IRC: Ping timeout: 240 seconds

<redtaboo> hueypriest~ can you express how this is different?

<sodypop> We as moderators are the first line of defence against PI, and it feels like the definition given to us by admins is being overlooked because a fear of the streisand effect.

<redtaboo> *explain

*** MooseTauman is now known as DerTauman

<airmandan|work> I'm just flabbergasted here

<airmandan|work> linking to a google search for "Laurelai" is a shadow-bannable PI offense

<hueypriest> we don't ban news articles for personal info. yes i know it's an insult to news to refer to gawker as that, but that is still what it is

<airmandan|work> linking to a jezebel article that has names, address, phone number, employment information, criminal records, pictures, and family info...that's a-ok, because that's "journalism"

<MillenniumFalc0n> hueypriest: where is the cut off between blog and news?

<sodypop> " Posting professional links to contact a congressman or the CEO of some company is probably fine, but don't post anything inviting harassment, don't harass, and don't cheer on or vote up obvious vigilantism. "

<hueypriest> airmandan the google search result example is probably a mistake on our part to be honest

<sodypop> I think this definition needs to change on the help page if "news" sites are exempt.

<hueypriest> milleniumfalc0n, we can't make/write a perfect distinction

<hueypriest> sodypop, perhaps that is needed. don't think we've seen this level of Pi on a news site before

<sodypop> It's been pounded into our heads that PI isn't allowed, never mentioned that news sites are exempt

<airmandan|work> I'm going to be frank here

<MillenniumFalc0n> hueypriest: can we all agree that this is wrong? Propragating witchhunt-enabling PI? Does it really matter that it's from a "news source"? It still breaks reddit.com/rules

<airmandan|work> and no disrespect is intended to anybody

<airmandan|work> but what I am taking away from this right now

<sodypop> It's troubling that now, when it is blow up and conflated, that this rule is being enforced in a seemingly selective manner.

<airmandan|work> is that to get action taken, we should act more like laurelai. be petulant, abrasive, insulting, and a constant thorn in everyone's ass.

<airmandan|work> that seems to work.

<redtaboo> airmandan|work~ but, we're better than that

<airmandan|work> redtaboo: I'd like to think so yeah

<airmandan|work> but if my livelihood is in jeopardy

*** dihydrogen has joined #modtalk

<DEADB33F> 'Proper' news outlets check facts and vet their sources before publishing, blogs do this too sometimes which is why there's no real clear cut definition.

<DEADB33F> Also, defacto news sites can host opinion pieces which are often nothing more than 'blogs' themselves, further blurring the definition.

<sodypop> Gawker is a gossip site / tabloid, not journalism.

<redtaboo> and their "proof" or "source" was a tumblr blog ran for express purpose of doxxing redditors

<a_redditor> do I see a "PI allowed news sources' whitelist in the brewing?

<redtaboo> I think the line should be set at verifiable sources

<hueypriest> airmandan i understand what you are saying and i appreciate you being frank

<hueypriest> i'll be frank too

<hueypriest> this is a pretty unique case

<hueypriest> we've never had a news site policy cause we've never really seen something like this before.

<DEADB33F> Yeah, it would have taken very little time to contact those who were doxxed and get them to confirm/deny the allegations.

<hueypriest> only smaller local news articles

<redtaboo> hueypriest~ the problem is, we all see it as something that could happen to us

<hueypriest> which we removed or not on a case by case basis

<Raerth> hueypriest, was there any sort of plan or clear process in place for how to deal with people who create subreddits around legal yet morally questionable material?

<sodypop> Given Gawker's history with reddit, the precensce of PI, and the call for a witch hunt, I don't think the jezebel "article" should be given the benefit of the doubt.

<redtaboo> ^^^^^^

<MillenniumFalc0n> hueypriest: let's get down to it. If you remove news articles on a case by case basis, what about this article makes you think it shouldn't be removed?

<@kemitche> sodypop: we try not to let personal greivances affect our policy making

<Raerth> as this is something that's sure to happen with reddit's current structure, and something that's sure to cause outrage on the "front page of the internet"

<hueypriest> redtaboo if it should happen to any of you or anyone else in the future we will remove it

<sodypop> kemitche, drop that it's gawker and my poiny is still valid.

<sodypop> *point

<sodypop> Vigilantism and personal info are a dangerous combination.

<airmandan|work> hueypriest: that's a reactive solution

<redtaboo> I appreciate that reassurance, hueypriest

<airmandan|work> that's not optimal

<airmandan|work> we should not be reactive

<airmandan|work> we should be proactive

<@kemitche> airmandan|work: removing anything is reactive.

<airmandan|work> and eventually, predictive

<airmandan|work> kemitche: right, exactly

<airmandan|work> instead of waiting for bad shit to show up, and then removing it

<airmandan|work> we should have an agenda that prevents it from happening in the first place

<@kemitche> so you want us to, what, right an algorithm that figures out if a linked article or anything it links to will cause someone somewhere to get doxed?

<hueypriest> sodypop we agree that it is a dangerous combo and that's why we have a harder line against personal info than most other places

*** MobileFalc0n has quit IRC: Ping timeout: 240 seconds

<redtaboo> off topic, but not (Link: http://www.reddit.com/r/TwoXChromosomes/comments/11brz4/can_anyone_help_identify_this_bikini_ive_seen_it/)http://www.reddit.com/r/TwoXChromosomes/comments/11brz4/can_anyone_help_identify_this_bikini_ive_seen_it/ <-- why is a creepshot in 2x's spam filter getting upvotes?

<airmandan|work> kemitche: it's not about algorithms, it's about culture

<@kemitche> *write

<airmandan|work> this happened because SRS learned that they basically can do whatever the hell they feel like

<@kemitche> reddit has, by design, a very loose and non-restrictive culture

<airmandan|work> yes it does

<Raerth> kemitche, then you need to decide if reddit's going to be the lovechild of 4chan and SA, or if it's going to be the public front page of the internet

<Raerth> it cannot be both

<airmandan|work> and that's fine for world news, programming, politics, and bronies

<Raerth> with the current structure, you're guaranteed to have people pushing the limits

<bep> oh no

<Raerth> that's human nature

<airmandan|work> but there was supposed to have been a clear line drawn at personal information and actions that threaten the integrity of reddit

<bep> did i miss cupcake

<bep> hueypriest: can you tell cupcake i'm sorry i missed her pm but i'll be online for next hourISH

<Raerth> there needs to be a process in place of how to deal with these people

<Raerth> something that we can point the press to when they start to complain

<bep> oh my dropped in the middle of an admin convo

* bep quiets

<airmandan|work> SRS learned that the rules don't apply to them. and now people are getting doxxed.

<airmandan|work> through inaction, we enabled that culture of defiance to develop

<Raerth> I have no problem with being 4chan 2.0, but if we want to be that, we should not be surprised when we get stuff like this happen

<airmandan|work> it's a problem that can't be fixed with a couple bans of a couple users, or reactive removing of individual posts

<hueypriest> airmandan we ban ANY user posting personal info on reddit

<bep> DEADB33F, nice to see you here <3

<DEADB33F> Yeah, long time no see.

<bep> :D cheers on the update of mod tools

<DEADB33F> Been busy with work for 6 month, so not much reddit.

<airmandan|work> we need to develop a long-term strategy for curating the culture of users

<MillenniumFalc0n> hueypriest: how does this "news" article not get removed for being PI, but people get banned for posting links to that article about Laurelai getting raided by the FBI?

<Raerth> we just need to be clear on how we deal with extremes

<MillenniumFalc0n> It just seems unfair

<airmandan|work> so that when people think, is this something I can do, they have a solid foundation of what is and isn't acceptable, not just to individual mods, not just to specific admins, but the whole social structure of the reddit community

<sodypop> With regards to the jezebel article, it feels like there has been a redefinition of what PI is when compared to all the blog posts and faq page about PI.

<sodypop> And also the other PI that has been removed in the past. It is frustrating to us when definitions shift.

<Raerth> the current drama, it's not the end of the world and it will blow over. but unless we know how to deal with future occurrences this will keep happening.

<airmandan|work> raerth has is right

<airmandan|work> *it

<hueypriest> milleniumfalc0n i get that it seems unfair, and we've probably been too quick to ban with some of the examples you mention

<airmandan|work> reddit has a cancer growing inside it

<airmandan|work> its stated mission is to destroy reddit

<redtaboo> hueypriest~ I disagree, I think laualais info is already out there and well spread... but I think you were right to ban for the removal of it

<redtaboo> er... removal == posting

<MillenniumFalc0n> hueypriest: I don't mean to offend, but frankly when you compare this response to previous responses to PI, it makes it look like you aren't removing the article out of...fear of PR backlash I guess?

<airmandan|work> if we're going to prevent this kind of thing from happening again, we need to deal with that cancer

<redtaboo> I think this is a complete reversal from that, and I think you should stay on the previous course

<airmandan|work> I realize that we tried to split the discussion and deal with PI and SRS separately

<MillenniumFalc0n> I agree

<airmandan|work> but they're two sides of the same coin here

<airmandan|work> we can't deal with one without dealing with the other

<redtaboo> airmandan|work~ we need to keep it split right now, I think

<bep> o.o why has hueypriest not got a cloak

<@kemitche> airmandan|work: banning SRS does not kill the cancer. Please stop trying to "force" us down that route.

<MillenniumFalc0n> I remove Laurelai's info when I see it, not because I know the admins will step in, but because I believe we should not allow doxxing of redditors to occur

<airmandan|work> kemitche: I'm not forcing you to do anything

<airmandan|work> I'm asking you to send a message

<hueypriest> millenniumfalc0n no offense taken.

<airmandan|work> because I think it would be productive towards achieving our long-term goals

<@kemitche> I'm telling you that we've heard this message before. And we'll hear it again

<Raerth> SRS is not the problem, they are the symptom

<Jaraxo> ^

<sodypop> This is pretty clear cut of inviting harassment against the users listed on the 'predditors' site and the person named in the jezebel article.

<sodypop> I cannot believe it is even this conflated of a decision.

<@kemitche> We don't ban subreddits just because we don't like them.

<Raerth> agreed

<airmandan|work> sodypop: incorrect word usage alert :p

<airmandan|work> kemitche: of course not

<airmandan|work> if I wanted reddits banned just because I didn't like them

<airmandan|work> I'd be asking you to kill /r/Republican :p

<@kemitche> Just like we don't ban subreddits with political views that differ from those of the admins

<airmandan|work> precisely

<solidwhetstone> @kemitche but you did ban a subreddit because it encouraged a certain type of behavior. and i'mi referring to /r/jailbait encouraging people to pass arond CP

<solidwhetstone> *around

<a_redditor> I'm all for banning subreddits just because the admins don't like them

<solidwhetstone> you meaning the collective 'you'

<a_redditor> get PG in here for a week

<MillenniumFalc0n> The problem is SRS's goal is to destroy reddit. Have you seen how often they float the phrase "Reddit delenda est"?

<MillenniumFalc0n> but anyways, that is a separate issue

<@kemitche> I swear to god, if one more person makes a parallel to jailbait, I'm leaving the channel for a week.

<MillenniumFalc0n> let's not derail the conversation from the more important point

<solidwhetstone> y u mad tho?

<redtaboo> guys, really talking abut SRS is just derailing the real issue

<MillenniumFalc0n> ^

<sodypop> Yes, we should really leave SRS out of this.

<airmandan|work> fine

<MillenniumFalc0n> how about we kick the next person to mention jailbait, instead of you leaving?

<solidwhetstone> you just mentioned it

<bep> !op

*** ChanServ sets mode +o bep

<@bep> k

<airmandan|work> I agree with milleniumFalc0n's idea

* solidwhetstone kick!

<sodypop> For this discussion, the issue I have is whether I can trust that my anonymity will be protected, even if a news site releases my PI.

<Raerth> kemitche, I'm not suggesting that. I'm suggesting that being too lax in informing people what is and isn't acceptable on reddit invites people to push the limits, and when you push the limits you will have people take umbrage at that. SRS hates the fact that people push the limits, so they are fighting against it. SRS are not the problem, the problem is we have no clear guidelines on what is acceptable other than "legal stuff", by not comdeming the

<Raerth> stuff SRS hates, we are condoning it by omission.

<sodypop> I mod the two largest subreddits, what assurance do I have against a news site that somehow gets my PI and then starts encouraging a witch hunt?

<@kemitche> no, the problem is the PERCEPTION that "not condemning" = "condoning"

<Raerth> yes

<Raerth> agreed

<Raerth> and we need to correct that

<@kemitche> You don't get pissed off that the phone company doesn't listen in on everyone's conversations for domestic violence and call the police on people

<solidwhetstone> !op

*** -ChanServ- You are not authorized to perform this operation.

<Raerth> agreed

<Raerth> but reddit is not clear on this

<hueypriest> i understand everyone is worried about being doxxed. and understand you don't agree with not banning the jezebel link, but we have a pretty good track record of banning personal info quickly, and i think have been pretty consistent over the years

<solidwhetstone> reddit =/= phone company...i think that parallel breaks down

* Raerth is not worried about being doxxed

<sodypop> Without assurances of anonymity, I have very little motivation to put in the many hours I spend moderating.

<hueypriest> this is a unique case we have not encountered before

*** x316nuts has quit IRC:

<Raerth> hueypriest, it's not an unpredictable case

<airmandan|work> hueypriest: In order to not agree with something, I have to understand it first

<hueypriest> raerth, what am i forgetting?

<sodypop> I thought the case of laurelai's PI being released was a pretty good comparison.

<airmandan|work> right now, I don't understand why the jezebel article is allowed

<solidwhetstone> ^

<sodypop> The jezebel article needs to be removed.

<hueypriest> there have been some other instances of news article linking to pastebin and such, and usually we don't ban those

<Jaraxo> sodypop, to play devils advocate, why should you have anonymity? If this was the real world on a real report into this kind of thing, someone in a similar position would be publicly named

<Raerth> hueypriest, not forgetting anything, just that this type of issue could be foreseen

<Jaraxo> I'm not saying I disagree with you, in fact, I agree with you

<Jaraxo> but you can't just assume that

<sodypop> Jaraxo, anonymity is a core value of reddit

<Jaraxo> in your opinion

<redtaboo> Jaraxo~ because, on reddit people witch hunt over tiny, tiny things

<sodypop> Maybe I've listened to one too many of Alexis's speaches.

<@kemitche> sodypop: we're pseudonymous, not anonymous

<redtaboo> I've been wished to die over removing a picture of a cat

<Jaraxo> exactly kemitche

<redtaboo> by, PIMA.. btw

<@kemitche> You can be anonymous on reddit, but you do have to work harder at it

<solidwhetstone> well we have this same fight in the US and other places. the fight for privacy. we have wiretapping laws in place because of it.

<airmandan|work> I'm not anonymous at all

<@bep> redtaboo: pima tried it on you?!

<Raerth> I've been wished to die for suggesting Radiohead gets posted too much in /r/music, can'

<Jaraxo> we can't act anonymously out in the real world, so why should we have the right to here?

<redtaboo> pima is a fuckfaced troll, bep

<Raerth> can't take this shit too seriously

<Raerth> ;)

<airmandan|work> i'm very easy to google

<@bep> tell me something i do't know, red

<Raerth> plus I got a big beard now and ready to take the world on, RAR

<airmandan|work> I don't particularly mind if people decide they need to mess with me

<airmandan|work> but

<airmandan|work> bring my family or my work into it

<airmandan|work> then I have a problem

<airmandan|work> and that's what's going on with the victims of the jezebel article

<airmandan|work> it's not just them being dragged through the mud

<airmandan|work> their families and colleagues go down with them

*** RestoreFear has quit IRC: Ping timeout: 256 seconds

<@kemitche> the root of the problem is, and always will be, that we cannot stop the rest of the internet. period. end of story. we can make policies and take actions on reddit, against activity that occurs on reddit that causes or encourages such behavior, when and if taking those actions will solve the problem instead of making it worse.

<sodypop> How many people here believe news articles should be exempted from the PI rule, and how many dont? I believe that is the focal point of the discussion here.

<airmandan|work> I don't think there should be any exemptions to the PI rule.

<sodypop> Me neither, airmandan

<Raerth> Nothing is judged by the best it can be, it's judged by the worst it can be. When someone wants to judge reddit, they won't do it by fundraising or Obama's visit, they will do it by /r/picturesofdeadniggers or /r/jailbait

<airmandan|work> raerth!

<airmandan|work> we said no JB comparisons!

<solidwhetstone> BANSTICK

<airmandan|work> you have been naughty.

<Raerth> I was not here :p

<@kemitche> airmandan|work: that's a cop out. No public officials contact info for legitimate reasons?

<@bep> sometimes i want the admins to forward on the information of suicidal people to the police

<airmandan|work> public official is not *personal* info

<airmandan|work> it's, by definition, public data

<@bep> that way they can save them

<@kemitche> "public data"

<@kemitche> So is the jezebel stuff public then? It's in the public, due to the predditors blog.

<@kemitche> See, I can make arguments that go to extremes too

<sodypop> "public officials" are already exempted in the PI faq section

<airmandan|work> I'm not using public as a descriptor, I'm using it as a statement of ownership

<sodypop> personal information cannot stop being personal information

<sodypop> Please let's not confuse personal and private info.

<@kemitche> the FAQ expandos are not all inclusive/exclusive

<@kemitche> they are examples, to help guide, specifically because this is such a gray area

<sodypop> Personal info of a public official, such as their cell phone number, if not released on their official site, should be considered personal info

<@kemitche> e.g., is a link to a small-business with a lot of personal information ok or not? Well, that depends on the context

<sodypop> Public contact information of public officials should remain fine to post.

<Raerth> personally, I would even remove public info if it's a call to witchhunt

<@kemitche> so by the flipside, would you leave semi-personal info if it's NOT a call to witchhunt?

<a_redditor> what's the protocol for if the subject of PI specifically asks for it to be removed?

<a_redditor> even if its easily accessible info?

<Raerth> kemitche, nope

<@bep> this is going nowhere, i am wandering away

<@bep> !deop

*** ChanServ sets mode -o bep

<sodypop> So can I argue that the context of the jezebel article is to witch hunt against the reddit users that have had their personal information posted?

<sodypop> I remove any FB screenshot in which the names are still legible, regardless of context.

<sodypop> The only exception to that is if it is by a public official or celebrity.

<Raerth> kemitche, please don't think I'm attack you and all you believe in (unless you are a Spurs supporter) I know you guys got a tough job, I'm just here to give my 2c

<@kemitche> Raerth: understood. Hope I'm not taking out any stress on you guys right now. I'm a little tense from all the stuff from the last day

<@kemitche> sodypop: how big of a celebrity? "celebrity" is not a binary yes/no status.

<Raerth> understood ;) I'm one of the thicker skinned people anyway, just making sure you know I'm not creating a flammable effigy

*** squatly has joined #modtalk

<@kemitche> that was a rhetorical question btw; the point being that there isn't any hardline, as much as you want to make one. As much as *we* would love to have a simple, easy, hard and fast rule. And because there's no hard line, there are judgment calls involved, which means you'll sometimes get seemingly contradictory actions depending on context.

<sodypop> kemitche, we're all frustrated and none of this is directed at anyone personally.

<@kemitche> Sometimes it's contradictory due to context; sometimes it's due to mistakes on our part or on the part of a mod somewhere.

<Raerth> kemitche, I had a very unpopular suggestion: (Link: http://www.reddit.com/r/ideasfortheadmins/comments/11bh11/verify_every_account_that_wishes_to_participate/)http://www.reddit.com/r/ideasfortheadmins/comments/11bh11/verify_every_account_that_wishes_to_participate/

<Raerth> it would definitely solve 90% of the drama we see

<@kemitche> (Which is why I get a bit flustered when people try to compare two instances from a high level, rather than examining the specific contexts involved)