Re:Reddit will not ban 'distasteful' content, chief executiv...
by danielweber on Wednesday October 17, 2012 @01:24PM
(#4665517)
People have suggested various rules:
- no sexual comments
- no kids
- no candid shots (where the subject is clearly not aware of the picture)
There's plenty of lines that could be drawn there. Various people have played stupid that no combination of these rules simply couldn't work, but this isn't a brand new problem no one has wondered about before.
Re:Reddit will not ban 'distasteful' content, chief executiv...
by tptacek on Wednesday October 17, 2012 @12:53PM
(#4665333)
I am drawing the line at compromising (sexualized, objectified, or deliberately embarrassing) photos of minors.
So again, I don't see the equivalence.
Re:Reddit will not ban 'distasteful' content, chief executiv...
by fosap on Wednesday October 17, 2012 @01:15PM
(#4665460)
What is compromising? Photos of feet? Completely harmless to most people, for some better than tits. There is also a hair fetish. And probably there are a way more. Only post pictures of people wearing burkas?
Re:Reddit will not ban 'distasteful' content, chief executiv...
by danielweber on Wednesday October 17, 2012 @01:25PM
(#4665519)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loki%27s_Wager
(boy it's hard to post a URL with a ' in it)
/edit
Or why the consent of a random 17 year old girl has more value that the consent of a random 20 year old guy working at a random CoS org.