Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Free speech is between you and the government. If a company that runs a forum says it bans people for abusive comments there's nothing to do with free speech. We see with Reddit that the ugliest users are the ones that are the loudest and drown out everyone else.


>Free speech is between you and the government.

No. Free speech is a principle that any party can choose to respect. Free speech has been one of the very core values of Reddit right from the beginning, in the form of the ability to create and manage a subreddit with very minimal restrictions.

Being a platform of free speech was the single biggest reason Reddit grew to be the giant community that it is today.

Then Pao comes along and repeatedly shows that she doesn't respect free speech at all. What do you expect the users to do, other than revolt?

It's easy to brush off these incidents as the doings of "the ugliest users", but remember that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. History books are filled with people being silenced due to their expression of uncomfortable ideas.


I see this glib line often (that free speech is only about the government), but I don't think it's right. It's true that the First Amendment specifically requires the US government to respect free speech. But that doesn't mean the general principle applies only to the government.

For example, John Stuart Mill's utilitarian defense of free speech in On Liberty is equally applicable to private parties and specifically says society and individual people should be open to expression of views they find abhorrent. He specifically covers widespread social ostracism as well as government laws. According to Mill, free speech is definitely not just about freedom from government restrictions.

I doubt you understand the principles of free speech better than John Stuart Mill. Or if you understand his argument in On Liberty and disagree, please explain why.


You're correct, it's an ignorant argument, and I see it posted all over the place. I wish America had a better education system, because it drowns out the real conversations that should be happening around free speech.

You have the right to say whatever you want, you do not have the right to say it in my home. I'm curious as to whether or not these individuals understand this, or are just another level of troll trying to stir the pot.


> you do not have the right to say it in my home.

Furthermore, I do have the right to say it "in public".

But, where is that "public" on the internet? I can make a website - a home - and invite other people to come visit me and listen to me ramble, or respond etc. But there is no public space, is there? And if not, should there be?

Most people don't own the homes they live in. Yet the landlord still doesn't get to tell them what to talk about over the dinner table. That's great, but imagine the government sold all sidewalks and public places to private interests, which dictated how you should dress and walk if you want to get out of your home, or to work. Should that be allowed?

Imagine getting thrown out of a mall because someone overheard and disapproved of your conversation there. Does that ever happen? I know there there is no clear line, but that there is one; e.g. if you trail other people and talk to yourself or a friend about them (especially if it's nasty and aggressive) in earshot, that's not exactly cool. But what, other than sanity, would stop all mall owners to agree that anyone e.g. declaring to like the color green should be kicked out, and to hire staff to enforce it? Would that be legal? If it was, should it be? And if it wouldn't be legal, why is that? In what ways, if at all, could or should this applied to the internet?


There are indeed public spaces on the internet, many governments and government bodies have sites that are public where you can file a petition or voice a concern.

Most people (63%) own their homes in America, and there are protections in place for people who rent. Your landlord cannot monitor you.

When it comes to the mall though, it's more a matter of scope and scale. Overhearing something in a mall affects a handful of individuals and the intent was not to broadcast. If you stand up on a table in the cafeteria and start spouting hate speech, you can and will be escorted out by security.

The internet is different, because you cannot accidentally overhear a conversation. Said anywhere on the internet, especial a place like reddit of HN, it is viewable by the entirety of internet users. So direct comparisons to the physical world will always fall short.


If you're looking for fair discussion about free speech, the US education establishment is the last place you want to look. They are completely overrun by PC moral panic, and not only real dissent and vigorous discussion representing diverse points is not welcomed, be it about free speech or any other topic, even mild critique from the friendly side or discomfort with exposure to unsettling thoughts is intolerable. E.g. see: http://www.vox.com/2015/6/3/8706323/college-professor-afraid


...and Reddit isn't even banning vile human beings - there are a bunch of subs for hating fat people and other worse subs.

Reddit is only banning subs that brigade.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: