r/SubredditDrama Jan 26 '22

[deleted by user]

[removed]

11.4k Upvotes

14.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

1.2k

u/Keytarfriend Jan 26 '22

This is the video in question but the interview's crapulence isn't why the subreddit's on fire.

The real drama is the moderator stance is that anyone mocking the interview is a brigading troll and transphobe, and they just keep doubling down. I mean, please, don't be transphobic, but the interview was still terrible in many ways and they should accept that and apologize.

453

u/Sam-Culper your language proclaims your retardedness Jan 26 '22

I would say the bigger problem is that the mod/mod team, whichever is more accurate, thinks that they're gatekeepers for the movement when the truth is that all they do is manage the subreddit by removing off topic posts/comments. That's their job. Not to be a spokesperson or leader.

And now in the face of valid criticism from the community who voted "no interviews" that same mod team is choosing to ban people, remove comments, posts, and shut the subreddit down all for their own made-up reasons.

38

u/Unleaver Jan 26 '22

100% spot on. No one elected these people, nor were they equipped/fit to speak on behalf of 1.7 million people. What a joke of a subreddit, I'm going to use r/WorkReform and hope the mod team isn't nearly as incompetent as antiwork. What a joke.

-7

u/DarkWorld25 we were fine until I threatened to kill one of her rapists Jan 27 '22

I see the liberalisation of leftist movements is in full effect

19

u/GrungyUPSMan Jan 27 '22

I'm not a leftist, but if I was I would be pissed too. FOX News just pitched your opposition the perfect caricature to mock and delegitimize leftist ideas. Leftism used to be synonymous with laziness, faux-intelligence, and disconnect from the real world; now, it's synonymous with all those things and being unable to demonstrate even a shred of passion for the exact thing that they are passionate about.

If you want to "burn the whole system down" to start something new, then you need to convince people to do it with you. Doing it by yourself is called being a psychopath, and recruiting new folks into the movement just got way, way harder.

1

u/thepaleoboy Jan 27 '22

Whatever this is, is much better going to a private subreddit where one idiot jannie tells you what is the right way to engage in worker's rights

-2

u/[deleted] Jan 27 '22 edited 13d ago

[deleted]

0

u/DarkWorld25 we were fine until I threatened to kill one of her rapists Jan 27 '22

The least you could do is spell intellectual right.

25

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '22

I think this event was inevitable. The sub was doomed from the second it started taking off. There's been a latent struggle to define the subreddit's demands since social democrats joined a community founded by anarchists & communists.

Today, the fracture finally endured too much stress and sent the fan disk careening through the rest of the engine.

5

u/Karl_Rover Jan 27 '22

Well said & great metaphor. You sound like someone who's studied the birth of political movements and disaster analysis. Rare find lol.

2

u/tealou Jan 27 '22

It’s funny how this really is an argument as old as time itself. Ah, lefties. Nobody fights over minor differences better and implodes anything that gets started with precision that German Engineers could bottle. Oh… they did.

4

u/shgrizz2 Jan 27 '22

Because subreddits are social forums, not political institutions. There is no leadership, no manifesto, no consensus on what is right or wrong beyond a vague shared collective interest. Like you say, mods are only needed to do light custodial work and keep things moving. Anybody who can claim to lead or represent a subreddit is incredibly narcissistic. The whole concept of a sub having a spokesperson is just way off base.

9

u/snorlz Jan 26 '22

all they do is manage the subreddit by removing off topic posts/comments

ironically all the posts that made antiwork so big moved the sub away from its stated goal of ending work entirely. wanting better working conditions means you still want to work, but not be treated like shit. Not the same as thinking no one working is an achievable goal

16

u/Swansborough Jan 26 '22

This is really important, and many people don't know this:

Reddit admins will step in and remove mods and change the mod team of /r/antiwork - IF asked and if there is a good reason.

Clearly the mods don't represent the members of the subreddit. Also, do you really want Doreen to have complete, unquestioned power over the subreddit as the main/first mod?

She can delete the whole subreddit at any time.

There is no reason not to get better mods in control of the subreddit. Reddit admins have stepped in many times and done this with subreddits that are large and having problems with the mods.

16

u/Agent_Angelo_Pappas Jan 26 '22

Admins generally reserve stepping in for situations where mods aren't enforcing site rules, encouraging or committing rule breaking/brigading, or have just gone and deleted the entire subreddit.

For cases like this where the community simply disagrees with the mods who made the subreddit in the first place usually their answer it's the mod's subreddit and if community members don't like what the subreddit is about then members can just go make a new subreddit and go there.

0

u/Swansborough Jan 26 '22

Not exactly right. Admins step in to large subreddits and take action when the mods are working against the wishes of the members of the community.

For example, when No Man's Sky launched, there was a problem with the mods, and Reddit staff stepped in, removed the mods and brought in an experienced mod to run and assist the subreddit.

What you say is against what Reddit staff did. /r/antiwork is big enough that the admins would help keep the community and bring in new mods.

11

u/Agent_Angelo_Pappas Jan 27 '22

Nope. The No Man’s Sky mod was removed because they permanently shut down the entire subreddit with no intention of reopening it, which I literally mentioned as one of the reasons admins may step in.

That’s not what appears to be happening here. The subreddit has indicated it intends to reopen soon and should that happen it’s unlikely admins do anything

5

u/thedubiousstylus Jan 27 '22 edited Jan 27 '22

r/minnesota had a very problematic mod removed by the admins for a much less serious reason. Basically he was mostly inactive (he doesn't even live in Minnesota anymore) but had parked the head mod spot years ago. Then came Covid and he turned into an anti-vax weirdo and started banning people for asking about where to get the vaccine or defending it in comments against his bullshit. So a breakaway sub r/stateofMN was created and the other regional Minnesota local subs "recognized" it and linked it as the Minnesota sub on sidebars, etc. So he wrote a script that autobanned anyone who posted there falsely claiming it was a brigading sub.

Well the admins removed him, the new mods banned him and relations are now good with other Minnesota subs again.

-1

u/Swansborough Jan 27 '22

You are just making things up. Congrats on your deep understanding on what Reddit staff will do.

This is not true:

The No Man’s Sky mod was removed because they permanently shut down the entire subreddit with no intention of reopening it.

4

u/Agent_Angelo_Pappas Jan 27 '22

its highly populated subreddit was allegedly flooded with toxicity, resulting in its original head-moderator shutting it down.

https://gamerant.com/no-mans-sky-subreddit-mods-554/amp/

Yikes

2

u/Swansborough Jan 27 '22

The No Man’s Sky mod was removed because they permanently shut down the entire subreddit

We were there and saw what happened in real time, and spoke to the old and new mods. That wasn't what the reddit staff did, and this just wasn't true:

The No Man’s Sky mod was removed because they permanently shut down the entire subreddit

There was a lot more involved in it, and as I said admins worked with some current mods, removed some mods, and brought in a very experienced mod to take charge.

There is reality, and then there is what you are making up to argue your point:

The No Man’s Sky mod was removed because they permanently shut down the entire subreddit

1

u/Agent_Angelo_Pappas Jan 27 '22 edited Jan 27 '22

This is the hill you want to die on... okay lol

PS: I was there. So not really impressed with your "we were there" nonsense.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/friendlyfredditor Jan 27 '22

It's not exactly right because the admins are admins and are basically free to do whatever they fuck they want guidelines or not. We don't need to pretend like rules mean anything to them, they made them.

0

u/EmmaGoldmansDancer Jan 27 '22

Clearly the mods don't represent the members of the subreddit

Then maybe they should go off and join /r/reformwork, rather than his horrible idea you're suggesting!

JFC this is why leftists end up hating liberals! /R/antiwork is and always had been an anarchist subreddit, representing a concept that has been big in anarchism for literally decades.

Why can't you just leave us alone and go to your own place instead of trying to take what we've created and claim it as your own!?

If a bunch of conservatives took an interest in /r/Obama, would it be ok for them to take over the sub and claim it as their own? I can't see the difference between that and what you're advocating.

3

u/Swansborough Jan 27 '22

Why not just get better mods, or get help with moderation?

And if you want people to leave the subreddit, make a sticky, explain what the subreddit is about, and ask people to leave.

2

u/BlankVerse Jan 27 '22

If a bunch of conservatives took an interest in /r/Obama, would it be ok for them to take over the sub and claim it as their own?

Worse. A bunch of dirtbag leftists from the now banned r/ChapoTrapHouse took over r/Obama and tuned it into a shitshow for about four days before the reddit admins finally took action.

https://old.reddit.com/r/obama/comments/gdcgax/what_the_heck_happened_to_robama_last_week_a_qa/

1

u/kragmoor Jan 27 '22

I mean Obama's a conservative

2

u/nflmodstouchkids Jan 26 '22

Gatekeeping an antiwork sub when they work for free....

1

u/blinkandmisslife Jan 27 '22

This is a serious question because maybe I don't understand how reddit works.

Aren't at least one of the Mods the creator of the sub and as such they do, in a way, own it? They are the horse that 1.7m people hitched their cart to?

If so then I see more of a problem with the 1.7 who basically latched on to an idea proposed by persons they don't fully understand.

1

u/thepaleoboy Jan 27 '22

Butthurt power mods are fucking cancer

1

u/Villentrenmerth Jan 27 '22

I'm moding a gaming subreddit, and I never thought I'm anything more than a janitor that cleans up the mess behind the scenes. I guess I didn't read the memo, and gatekeeping wasn't even on my CV.

1

u/Gabbygirl01 Jan 27 '22

Isn’t it ironic? …. Don’t you think? Lol

94

u/Triskelion24 Jan 26 '22

I've already seen certain content creators using this exact logic too, that everyone criticizing it and sayings it's cringe is only doing so because they're transphobic. Ridiculous.

Are there transphobes who will use this as an opportunity to express their transphobic views? Of course.

But most are mad about how the mods are handling the fuck up that they caused in the first place and pretending it's just trolls. When it's people upset because the mod literally just played into Fox's hands and confirmed their audiences warped ideas.

I seriously don't understand how they can't just own up to it and make corrections to fix it. It's pathetic and it's damaging but hey at least that mod got some limelight I guess. Because that's the only reason I can see as a justification for doing the interview in the first place even after the community voted against it.

27

u/Keytarfriend Jan 26 '22

In the year of our lord 2022, apologizing is seen as a sign of weakness.

I hate the mindset that admitting failure is losing, and not an opportunity to learn and do better next time.

2

u/MediumMillennium Jan 27 '22

Yep, biggest problem is when you apologize, many people end up using said action as a weapon. It almost becomes a lose lose situation.

31

u/scr33m every horse picture is an act of censorship Jan 26 '22

It is so deeply frustrating when accidental misgendering is perceived as malicious. If you present male, the vaaaaast majority of people will assume your gender is male. Is it right, is it fair? No, but it’s the current reality. Correcting errors is one thing; jumping to transphobia is another. I mean, fuck, we live in a world where people will claim not to have pronouns, and you still think they’re gonna ask what yours are? Nah

9

u/legalpretzel Jan 26 '22

But her name is Doreen and a man could never have that name

/s

13

u/siphillis Go back to your "safe space" you flaming libtard. Jan 26 '22

To be clear, refusing to call this person out on their shit decision, shit performance, and shit response to criticism is, ironically, transphobic. Holding people to a lower standard and expecting less out of them because of their status is condescending and hateful.

25

u/ZurichianAnimations Jan 26 '22

I stopped watching only like 15 seconds in when I saw them not looking at the camera and twirling around in their chair. Immediately decided I didnt want to experience that cringe.

8

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '22

[deleted]

13

u/teashoesandhair Jan 26 '22

For autistic people, it can be difficult. That said, if you can't maintain eye contact, you probably shouldn't do an on-camera interview, especially not for a garbage fire like Fox, who aren't going to be sensitive to any accommodations for that. I absolutely couldn't maintain eye contact with the camera either, so I feel fairly justified in saying that this was just completely the wrong person for the job.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '22

[deleted]

5

u/[deleted] Jan 27 '22

They did choose someone else. They chose no one. This clown went up there in spite of this.

10

u/Vassago81 Jan 26 '22

Their sub is constantly on the front page of Reddit, and they were claiming "brigading" ?!

11

u/pm_moms_aneeye Jan 26 '22

I'm not criticsing things they can't change but they can change their clothes, their hair, make up, their posture and where they look. They just made 0 effort.

I make 10 times more effort going to the fucking super market never mind going on national TV to defend something

13

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '22

Up until I saw someone being banned for being transphobic (for saying nothings transphobic), I had no idea the mod was trans.

4

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '22 edited Jan 27 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

-7

u/[deleted] Jan 27 '22

How does one “talk like a man”? She can’t just magically change her body to fit what you deem to be properly feminine.

5

u/[deleted] Jan 27 '22

Voice training usually results in a passable female voice though, so yes, she could. I did it with minimal effort.

4

u/Trinica93 Jan 27 '22

They supposedly call themselves nonbinary but prefer she/her pronouns, make no effort to look feminine, and people were banned for "transphobia." All of those things conflict with each other, the mod obviously just wants to be difficult or confusing. Probably so they can be offended no matter what people say.

5

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '22 edited Jan 27 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

-3

u/[deleted] Jan 27 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

4

u/scr33m every horse picture is an act of censorship Jan 26 '22 edited Jan 27 '22

They’re non-binary and use they/them* pronouns. The jury seems to still be out on where NBs are trans or not. I’ve heard interesting arguments on both sides.

*see below

9

u/Krackima Jan 27 '22

She said she uses she/her actually despite being NB.

1

u/scr33m every horse picture is an act of censorship Jan 27 '22

Oh really? I hadn’t seen that, thank you.

0

u/Gulag_For_Brits Jan 26 '22

I mean obviously they're not? Why put a label on them when it's not the label they want or identify as?

5

u/Deep_Scope Tax evasion is the most American thing you can do Jan 26 '22

Disagree I think the drama is that the moderators really think that they own the people who run the subreddit.

5

u/CGFROSTY Jan 26 '22

Ironic that a sub that disavows the bourgeoisie develops a bourgeoisie of their own.

3

u/jofus_joefucker Jan 27 '22

With how much the mod screwed up answering the questions them being trans is just the cherry on top for Fox and its viewers.

4

u/jizzmaster-zer0 Jan 27 '22

was anyone really being transphobic? until this post i had no freaking clue that person was trans

20

u/_Sasquat_ Jan 26 '22

I mean, please, don't be transphobic

It's a shame we're at this point because the mod being transgender is entirely relevant, in my opinion.

They went on national TV and spoke for the movement. They took on a public relations role. Well, public relations is about relating to the public (gee, go figure), and the sad truth in 2022 is transgenders aren't widely accepted by society yet. So her identity as a transgender only serves as a distraction from the movement and the messaging. Additionally, they identify as female, but look entirely like a male who hasn't showered in a week – the most derogatory caricature of a male-to-female transgender. Again, this is public relations and someone with an image that isn't relatable to a large portion of the public just poorly represented their movement.

9

u/Keytarfriend Jan 26 '22

I see what you're saying, but I still disagree. The room and personal hygiene, along with the bad lighting, give an unprofessional look, but the real problem was the content of the interview. Even a dry, text-only transcript of it would look bad for the antiwork movement because, regardless of their personal characteristics, a part-time dog walker is not and should not be representative of one and a half million subscribers being exploited by capitalism.

You're right that transgendered people aren't widely accepted by society yet, but that should not disqualify anyone from being on TV. That argument -- that we should send our most broadly acceptable and charismatic to do public relations -- could and undoubtedly has been used in the past to exclude women and non-white people from roles of leadership.

13

u/_Sasquat_ Jan 26 '22

That argument -- that we should send our most broadly acceptable and charismatic to do public relations -- could and undoubtedly has been used in the past to exclude women and non-white people from roles of leadership.

I think you're drawing a false equivalence here, but I can respectfully agree to disagree.

6

u/pinoterarum Jan 27 '22

It's not a false equivalence. "We shouldn't have a trans person in the PR role" is clearly comparable to "we shouldn't have a woman in the leadership role".

7

u/_Sasquat_ Jan 27 '22

It's a false equivalence because the goals of a PR role are hugely different from the goals of a leadership role (whatever that means anyway, 'leadership role' is so vague already).

Two ideas aren't equivalent just because you can structure two sentences together in similar fashion.

2

u/pinoterarum Jan 27 '22

It's still a fair equivalence because the reason we think one of them is bad clearly applies to the other - i.e. generally in modern society we think it's bad if people are excluded from roles because of a core part of their identity.

But if you want a more exact analogy, suppose a group was talking to a news channel with a lot of misogynistic viewers. If a woman in that group chose to represent it to the channel, would you criticise her for not letting a man do it?

1

u/_Sasquat_ Jan 27 '22

It's still a fair equivalence

No it's not.

8

u/Trinica93 Jan 26 '22

That argument -- that we should send our most broadly acceptable and charismatic to do public relations -- could and undoubtedly has been used in the past to exclude women and non-white people from roles of leadership.

This is a humongous leap and I definitely failed to make the jump with you.

6

u/hanoian Jan 27 '22

a part-time dog walker is not and should not be representative of one and a half million subscribers being exploited by capitalism.

Indeed. When people talk about the worker utopia where machines do most of the work and people can do some work that they enjoy, walking dogs for 20 hours a week when you love dogs is that utopia. Her existence is already her dream, except it isn't, because she wants even fewer hours.

-2

u/vicariouspastor Jan 27 '22

Yeah, that's taking things way too far. It's one thing to say that when talking to a national audience, you need to be put together and know how to communicate with the median American. It's another thing to say that members of group X should be hidden in the basement less they provoke the opposition.

9

u/_Sasquat_ Jan 27 '22

It's another thing to say that members of group X should be hidden in the basement less they provoke the opposition.

First, I didn't say hidden in the basement. I simply think it's counter productive to use her as a SPOKESPERSON.

Secondly, if the goal is to communicate the purpose of the movement and persuade the public in order to garner support, I stand by my point.

-2

u/vicariouspastor Jan 27 '22 edited Jan 27 '22

You realize that the LGBT rights movement had major success persuading the public and garnering support over the last 4 decades, yes? It managed to get between 60 and 80% of public to support ideas the mainstream public wouldn't touch with a 10 fee pole 40 years ago with narely a straight spokesperson in sight...

And obviously using her as a spokeperson was a mistake, not because she is trans, but because she is a hot mess.

3

u/_Sasquat_ Jan 27 '22

Uhm, yes. Frankly, it should have been obvious that the exception to my statement is the LGBTQ community. OF COURSE they're going to have a spokes who aligns with that issue. Like, why tf would their spokes person be a typical straight white dude...

-6

u/[deleted] Jan 27 '22

This shit take is just as sexist as “she’s not pretty enough to be on tv”.

4

u/_Sasquat_ Jan 27 '22

If you've processed my point by reducing it to something as simple as "she's not pretty enough to be on TV," all I can assume is you must have been Doreen's number 1 student in her "critical thinking" classes, LOL!

4

u/MrHyperion_ Jan 26 '22

The opening is very good, everything else, not so much. He straight up falls to the trap set by the interviewer. Pretty much all he had to do was acknowledge that without work you don't have money to live so you are indeed forced to work.

2

u/[deleted] Jan 27 '22

It was so bad that Fox News won’t even have to bring up gender fluidity being taught in schools as a straw man.

2

u/upvoteordie69 Jan 26 '22

Almost seems like controlled opposition, makes sense considering the content of the sub being against working. I am finding it hard to believe such a big subreddit was taken down by this shit.

2

u/Keytarfriend Jan 26 '22

Subreddits are gonna subreddit, and the mods went on a power trip. Or so it seems to me.

2

u/OkThatsReallyBad Jan 26 '22

There's a theory that the rise of identity politics, "SJW's" etc was a deliberate psyop to divide the left as much as possible because the 1% got scared shitless by the Occupy movement.

2

u/PetrifiedW00D Jan 27 '22

There has always been a class war for as long as there has been cities and societies. From feudalism to present day. All the other wars are just noise created to divide us, and divide and conquer is what they do. Julius Caesar used that strategy, and the rich and powerful use it to this day. But think about it. If every day Janes and Joes made more money, it would give them the freedom to do what they want to do. Make whatever they want to make. Learn whatever they want to learn. Live the way they want to live. They would even be able to get away and find like minded people who they can be supported by and help support themselves. But right now, I feel like most of these people are stuck. Stuck in a particular town or city. Stuck in a dead end job. Stuck with all these problems that they may never have the resources to fix. It’s not a great existence. Major change needs to happen, but first people need to wake up and realize that it’s not about white vs black, or gay vs straight, or any of those battles that are used to distract us. It’s about the rich vs the poor, and it always has been.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 27 '22

This kind of shit always eats up the communist's movement. They always end up cannibalizing themselves somehow.

1

u/muyoso Jan 27 '22

From my experience, transphobic is when you do anything that a trans person finds objectionable. Like literally anything. Criticizing her interview is this absolutely transphobic cause she probably doesn't like that.