• xam54321@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    1 year ago

    True, but back then you could add anyone as a mod, he didn’t “moderate it” but was a “moderator on it”.
    A minor but key difference that means he just didn’t care about perverts or that he was a leader of perverts.

    • mrbubblesort@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      He was free to take 2 seconds and remove himself from the list. He never did. It was always a “joke” on the site until it wasn’t.

      • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        Why would he have a moral obligation to remove himself from the list or pay attention to what subs he was added as mod? I could see complaining that as CEO he didn’t choose to ban the sub sooner, but moderator status seems kind of irrelevant here.

        • mrbubblesort@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          You gotta realize reddit was a lot smaller back then and the admins, including spez, were much more active and engaged on the site. He was very much in on the “joke”

          • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            1 year ago

            Seems totally plausible and likely that he was added as moderator on a long list of subs and never perused or paid attention to that list, so how would it illustrate that? The infamy of that sub makes a lot more sense as evidence that he must have been aware of it, and that would be a legitimate basis for criticism. The moderator thing is just a memeable detail that is itself true but implies something that seems to be not true: that he had a direct role in operating the sub beyond running Reddit and allowing it to exist. I don’t think there’s a case for it having any significance beyond that false implication.

            • Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              10
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Copying my reply from a different subthread:

              You know they made a custom award for the creator of the jailbait sub called “Pimp Daddy,” right? And that for a long time one of the autosuggested results from Google when you googled reddit was the jailbait sub? Do you think a CEO of a “major company” (not what reddit was at the time, they were still desperately drumming up users) is somehow unaware of what shows up when you google their company?

              • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Like I said, that kind of argument would be better, it’s not directly related to the moderator thing afaik