Reddit CEO Steve Huffman has confessed to modifying the posts of some users on the most visible Donald Trump-supporting “subreddit” community after they repeatedly slung verbal abuse in his direction.
The story begins earlier this week, when The New York Times published a report on Comet Ping Pong, a Washington DC pizza place that a false news item on social media had pegged as the center of a child-abuse ring run by Hillary Clinton and her campaign head John Podesta, despite a lack of any evidence.
Following that report, Reddit took steps to shut down the “r/Pizzagate” subreddit community, which had the stated goal of proving the existence of a conspiracy centering on Comet Ping Pong. “We don’t want witchhunts on our site,” says the warning that replaced the Pizzagate page on Reddit.
The move to shut down r/Pizzagate proved controversial to users of “r/The_Donald,” Reddit’s most popular community for supporters of Donald Trump. Those users repeatedly left comments to the effect of “f**k u/spez” and other forms of abuse, including Huffman’s “u/spez” Reddit name in the post to make sure he was notified of each new message.
On Wednesday afternoon, members of “The_Donald” noticed that their posts had changed without their knowledge or consent: Instead of referencing Huffman himself, the posts now hurled the same expletives at the moderators of the “The_Donald” community.
Angry “The _Donald” members accused Reddit leadership of modifying or otherwise censoring their posts — which turned out to be correct, when Huffman posted the following comment, confessing that it was him personally who was performing the changes (with expletives taken out):
Yep. I messed with the “fuck u/spez ” comments, replacing “spez” with r/the_donald mods for about an hour. It’s been a long week here trying to unwind the r/pizzagate stuff. As much as we try to maintain a good relationship with you all, it does get old getting called a pedophile constantly. As the CEO, I shouldn’t play such games, and it’s all fixed now. Our community team is pretty pissed at me, so I most assuredly won’t do this again.
Comment from discussion The Admins are suffering from low energy – have resorted to editing YOUR posts. Sad!.
“As the CEO, I shouldn’t play such games, and it’s all fixed now. Our community team is pretty pissed at me, so I most assuredly won’t do this again,” Huffman wrote.
Now, users of “The_Donald” are accusing Huffman of having destroyed Reddit’s credibility
Ahh the plot it thickens the liberal dirty work of the left more reasons you cant trust these darn liberal journalists and the Useless Nations who want to control and monitor the internet that was not created by Al Gore
Wednesday, November 23, 2016 Computer scientists to Clinton campaign: Challenge election results
Do you want to prove them wrong with a recount of the critical states? The margins there were narrow. There is the fact that Clinton is now ahead in the popular vote count by over 2 million votes, and the oddity that the election results have run contrary to the predictions of nearly every poll for several weeks leading up to the election. There was already reason to suspect the possibility of electronic meddling by computer hackers.
It looks like the Green Party has taken the initiative and will be filing for a recount. They managed to raise the funds to petition for a recount in Wisconsin in a matter of hours. This is an unexpected development. I don’t find it a welcomed development, and I say that as a Clinton supporter. I want an accurate count, but a different outcome could trigger some sort of serious crisis. Going through this past election once was more than enough.
Greg, first. The popular vote you keep harping on is getting tiresome. It shows you are a complete and total fool. The popular vote means nothing in the presidential election. So quit adding the remark to your posts. It makes you more of a sad sack than every.
Second, in regards to the math/comp sic person saying there may be an issue. He is now trying to explain what he said is not what is being touted he said.
Michigan law states a margin of 2000 votes or less to permit a recount. So that avenue is lost.
Stein has no standing nor can she prove to a judge in pre-trial that she has incurred injury for that judge to recommend to proceed with such a case. This for every state.
Liberals need to go soak their heads and get over it the party is over and their little snowflake balloons have been burst
@Greg: “the oddity that the election results have run contrary to the predictions of nearly every poll for several weeks leading up to the election.” Not so “odd” when you consider the lying nature of the MSM and the number of skewed surveys and polls conducted, oversampling Democrats. The oddity was that anyone with enough intelligence to be self-propelled would consider having a proven liar and incompetent as President.
By all means, let’s dig into the election results. I would like to know the truth about those 3 million illegal immigrants estimated to have voted. I also want to see the results of the absentee voting, particularly the military vote. Let’s also pay special attention to the results in Illinois, Virginia and New York.
Only, there’s this: Hillary pays for it. It’s her party. Of course, I find it “odd”, as you say, that only NOW do liberals show concern about voter fraud. After all, it NEVER happens, right? No need to guard against it or put any protections in place, because that is “racist”. Is demanding a recount “racist”?
@John hardesty, #4:
The electoral votes for each state are derived from the popular vote for those states, so the two things are not entirely disconnected from one another.
I think a number of points argue strongly in favor of doing recounts in critical states:
Clinton is ahead in the popular vote by the widest margin in history of any presidential candidate projected to lose the electoral college count. Her margin is now so large that it dwarfs all past instances; it stands out as an anomaly among all such cases. Refer to the “margins” column on the top five items in this list.
The election results are contrary to the outcome that was projected by virtually every poll that was conducted during the weeks heading up to the election. In recent years the poll averages have almost always been getting it right. That’s also an anomaly.
The electoral college result will turn on small margins in only a few states, and it was known well ahead of time that it would likely do so. That information defined the few areas where altering vote counts only slightly could change the entire outcome of the election.
It has been known for months that computer hackers operating on behalf of a foreign state have been accessing computer systems within the United States far more secure than some of our electronic voting machine systems and ballot tabulation systems. The vulnerability of those systems has been a secret to no one. The hacking incidents have clearly shown a strong bias against the Clinton campaign—as did the releases of information through Wikileaks.
Given all of that, when computer scientists are saying it looks like something may be amiss, why should anyone automatically assume that our vulnerable voting and tabulating systems were not successfully targeted? Should we not double check the critical counts and closely inspect the critical systems?
For someone who pulled 1.2 % of the total vote,
you have to wonder where she got the money to question the vote !
She doesn’t have standing in many/most jurisdictions.
She has to be one the candidates within 0.5 – 1.5 percent of the other.
In a handful of jurisdictions you need the thin margin and the recount requested by voters.
But recounts do NOT challenge the validity of the voters. Just the count of what the voters said.
1) If there were going to be votes manufactured, they would have already been done Nov 8. Being horribly concerned this will be a path to cheating doesn’t make sense.
2) If hacking happened, the hackers would have had to know which states to do. They would have had to know FL would go Trump and that these three unexpected states would make the difference. The machines are NOT ONLINE. They have no connection to the internet. So the people hacking have to know which states and machines to travel to and affect, and they have to know this before the final machine audit/check done by each state pre election.
3) All of Michigan uses paper check ballots. Not just some counties. All of it. The 7% story we got a few days ago that the source of the issue is Hillary counties looked different by 7% if paper tracked vs pure machine makes no sense in that context — AND . . . the comp science guy in question has gone public and said that article was filled with errors and the 7% issue had nothing to do with a presumption Hillary did not get a good count. His point in the interview was to audit the machines, not do a recount. He doesn’t think the results will change, he just wants confidence they weren’t hacked.
I don’t think the results would change, either, but it might be important that people be assured that’s the case by resolving any legitimate questions. Then we need to eliminate any potential for such manipulation well ahead of the next election.
There’s absolutely no reason to imagine that foreign states or other hostile entities will not take full advantage of any exploitable weaknesses in the system to attack the integrity of the vote. They have, in fact, meddled with our election this time around, even if not through weaknesses in the mechanics of the voting process itself. That targeted hacking and the carefully timed release of illegally obtained material through Wikileaks took place can’t really be questioned. Everybody knows it happened.
Ah, Greg, NOW all the fraud in CA makes sense!
I had wondered why Hillary was committing so much voter fraud in a state she was sure to win.
To pull the very ploy you fell for.
Remember the huge pile of ballots piled up on the porches of single, blind people in CA?
They were supposed to get picked up, filled out DEM all the way down then turned in to PAD the results so much that later, IF she lost, a recount could be demanded based on skewed results in CA for her.
Well, for every one crime caught, an approx 10 get through.
And a lot of these got caught!
IF Mich, Wis and Penn need recounts, so, too, does CA.
It will prove a disaster for Hillary.
I note that she’s keeping herself out of it.
Fact is, as posters above noted, the polls were skewed in favor of Hillary until the very last.
But SHE had to know she was in trouble.
Surely she didn’t believe those skewed polls.
Not unless she’s even dumber than we all thought.
@Greg: @Greg: Greg, from the Gen Election Results updated as of 11/23/16, HRC 8,021,534 Trump 4,196,371, HRC has a 3.8 million vote lead in CA alone. The 2 most populace states CA and NY would dictate the Pres winner every time if we went with he popular vote. The framers were and still way more smarter than you or I.
It stands to reason if it were a popular vote contest the candidates would campaign differently. But it’s not so they campaign for the race as it is.
HRC will never be president and that makes me feel good. Trump has not been a part of the problems created and or amplified over the last 8 years, HRC has.
Only time will tell what we have elected but I’m ready to give it a shot.
This “computer scientist” doesn’t actually believe fraud was involved.
@Nanny G: “Pile of ballots piled up on the porches of single blind people in Cal.”
That’s so ridiculous it’s funny Nan.
What else ya got?
HRC may be many things but she’s certainly not dumb.
Dumb would be those who believe stuff like B.S POSTED HERE NAN