[sir_bearington]

The irony is that I almost certainly would have zero idea who this person was or the existence of this controversy were it not for this crackdown.

On one hand I can empathize with people seeing someone they know have negative press about them shared on a site they run and wanting to do something. But I thought the point of professionalism was refraining from this kind of behavior and applying rules consistently even when there is a personal connection. This kind of special-case behavior in favor of people with ties to the site is likely counter productive.

[BrianOnHN]

> The Streisand effect is a social phenomenon that occurs when an attempt to hide, remove, or censor information has the unintended consequence of further publicizing that information

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect

Edit: added quote.

[BrianOnHN]

If you're like me, you may also be interested in https://rejected.substack.com/ *

* No affiliation, just stumbled across it today

[SketchySeaBeast]

I wonder if her name will be remembered for the effect longer than for her celebrity.

[silicon2401]

It's already happened, I had no idea Barbara Streisand was a person, but I have heard of the Streisand effect

[BrianOnHN]

Barbara who?

Edit: seriously, I couldn't tell you what she's done. Sing? Movies? Both?

[dfraser992]

Oh dear... I assume you're being sincere, so no shade or anything like that. I just realized exactly how old I am relative to you and the other person who posted the same sentiment. ;)

Both. She was a big big name of my parent's generation (think Rhianna version 2, Rhianna is version 3 or 4 or 5... if you go back to Maria Callas or Josephine Baker being version 1)

[frogpelt]

There's a whole bunch of people who think (for good reason) that George Foreman is famous for inventing and marketing a counter-top grill.

[BrianOnHN]

I guess Rihanna better do something worth her namesake soon, then!

And no "shade" or anything... am I using that right?... but those latter two names are more foreign than B.S.

[SketchySeaBeast]

Cool. I feel vindicated and very old at the same time.

[proc0]

I've said many times on here, people seem to not believe it. Banning literally achieves the opposite of what it intends to do... hell, if I was a marketer I would use banning and censorship as a kind of promotion/campaign tool. But nooo, people think with feelings, and the word that needs banning just sounds so horrible and is so offensive, so lets iron fist everyone into forgetting it... lol.

[mdoms]

I think you're seeing a bit of survivorship bias here. When you see something that has been banned you can say "ah huh! the ban didn't work, I still saw this". But you're not seeing the banned things you're not seeing.

[hi5eyes]

no one will on here or reddit will remember this situation in a week.the only part of the internet that will care past a week is most likely the sites like gab, and we all know what they think of lgbtq+

banning definitely works, its not like reddit's reputation for mod abuse isn't unknown [1]

1. https://www.theverge.com/2016/11/23/13739026/reddit-ceo-stev...

[ectopod]

You're not wrong. But the person concerned is notoriously litigious, and their employer has a legal duty to protect them from harassment. (Because, AFAIK, they are British and employed in the UK by reddit.) So reddit has no good choice here.

[dragonwriter]

Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but I was fairly certain she left the UK sometimes in 2019 and was employed by Reddit in the US. (But is still a UK citizen and presumably has substantial British interests, so both the UKs notoriously intense libel liability and the USs [and some US state’s] workplace environment laws would both potentially be in play.)