Since you both seem well acquainted with this site, I’d be curious to learn your take on the kerfuffle - what happened? Was it simply a reaction to attempts at monetizing, or were there political considerations wherein censorship, etc. became a problem? I’d rather hear your perspectives than what mainstream sources (of course both of you may be just that!) might say.
Reddit is in meltdown.
The hugely popular link-sharing site is in a state of virtual lockdown after the volunteers who run some of the site’s biggest communities (known as “subreddits”) went on the digital equivalent of a general strike. This followed the sacking of Victoria Taylor, a popular site admin, after a Reddit Q&A with the Rev. Jesse Jackson went badly for the activist preacher.
...
It’s another blow for interim Reddit CEO Ellen Pao, with users dubbing her “Chairman Pao” ever since the June crackdown.
Ellen Pao is also notorious for her opportunistic abuse of discrimination law: http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/03/30/thankyouellenpao-only-if-you-like-bullying-vexatious-opportunists/
Hi, cliff notes version due to limited time.
- admins/mods unreasonable, and in some cases corrupt dictatorial overreach censoring and banning people. Larger censorship issues are an issue with many, but that’s normal with the crazy crowd. They want completely unbridled speech, even including jailbait stuff.
- ignoring unpaid mods needs/concerns over several years.
- Firing important employees, without a replacement plan to keep commitments to outside parties. Not professional. In one case firing someone with leukemia, after making the commitment not to fire them. Plenty more stories like this.
- Completely ignoring users concerns and complaints. Sure it’s their job to run the site, but the users are the site, the community. Digg learned this lesson when they ignored their users, and lost 75% of their traffic.
- the monetizing thing is actually low on the list of most users complaints, if it’s done right.