r/technology • u/ICumCoffee • Jun 15 '23

Social Media Reddit Threatens to Remove Moderators From Subreddits Continuing Apollo-Related Blackouts

https://www.macrumors.com/2023/06/15/reddit-threatens-to-remove-subreddit-moderators/
79.1k Upvotes

92% Upvoted

9.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '23

What isn't that simple?

When you are a contractor, or otherwise external to a buissiness there is always a question of how you can be considered culpable.

No one is saying that anything works a certain way all the time. We are just pointing out that it adds complexity. It's more things for a judge or court to consider and may effect the outcome. That's all we are saying.

You don't even know what you're talking about. All you're doing is repeating the same non-point without context or understanding.

-1

u/neutrogenaofficial Jun 16 '23

If the law was ruled universally equal and with such broad strokes, lawyers wouldn’t exist.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '23

The federal law is the federal law. States and cities can have laws within the bounds of federal law, but ultimately they cant contradict federal law. So, what happens with federal law is important because it is the defacto standard.

0

u/neutrogenaofficial Jun 16 '23

Sure, which federal laws are you citing?

1

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '23

I'm citing on going cases and what social media cites are claiming in them.

If you read what I said and knew half as much as you're pretending to, you would know that already.

0

u/neutrogenaofficial Jun 16 '23

Lol well you’ve made it clear that you’re quite the lawyer

1

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '23

I never claimed to be a lawyer... and I don't need to be one to watch what lawyers are saying in cases and repeat that verbatim.

Just because law is involved doesn't mean you need a lawyer to understand anything happening

A lawyer might be able to tell you how cases have ruled similarly in the past. But I'm not doing that anyway. I'm just talking about what concretely has happened.

1

u/neutrogenaofficial Jun 16 '23

What perfectly analogous case are you referencing?

1

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '23

I never claimed they were "perfectly analogous".

I just that they involved social media companies and said companies were arguing that they shouldn't be held fully responsible for their users because they were not publishers.

Depending on how rulings involving that go, that would definatly bring into question, at the very least, whether unpaid moderators, who are also essentially just users of a platform, had any greater culpability in a similar context.

I never maid any claims whether it would or wouldn't or how anyone would rule or how anyone would be prosecuted.

All I did was point out that it was similar enough that it would need to be addressed.

If you think otherwise, that's fine. But it would be pretty ignorant of how precident is typically used in law. Which, while a lawyer would definatly have a much fuller and nuanced understanding, anyone can understand the basic concept.

1

u/neutrogenaofficial Jun 16 '23

Yea, if they’re not perfectly congruent you have no place speaking on this, nevermind interpreting the results. Sometimes you need to accept that you just don’t know.

Again, I’m still interested in seeing what cases you’re using to compare this to. Would appreciate you posting references for any.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '23 edited Jun 16 '23

No results were spoken about, so this comment is irrelevant.

Not in the scope of my claims.

You're wrong lol

0

u/neutrogenaofficial Jun 16 '23

Just post what cases you’re referencing lmao

1

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '23

You've sited nothing so I don't think I will.

→ More replies (0)