[dangus]

I’m not really talking about the definition of martyrdom, I’m talking about the effects of martyrdom on the general public.

E.g., what would Christianity become had Jesus not died on the cross? The central motivation of the Christian faith is that Christ died for our sins. It wouldn’t be so impactful if Jesus died of old age like everyone else.

I’m basically saying that being a martyr is something that amplifies a person’s image, and that’s the reason why Aaron came up in the first place.

If he took the six month plea deal and was alive today, he would not be part of this discussion.

[nullc]

I'd agree that people aren't invoking him because they care about him personally, people seldom give a darn when someone else isn't being given full credit. But I think it doesn't have anything to do with martyrdom: People were complaining about the reddit thing wrt Aaron while he was alive too.

The comments are driven out of concern and feelings of loss related to reddit's former perceived public-spirited democratic spirit in favor of corporate interests. It's only natural that people would highlight an early participant who seemed more aligned with their perspective and who seems to have been diminished in the modern narrative.

Does Aaron's separation with reddit explain its cultural changes? Things are seldom that simple. But when talking on a forum about our concerns with how reddit has changed over the years a simple view is perfectly appropriate-- so for some people bringing up the missing co-founder, is a suitable way to express their views.

[dangus]

Perhaps you’re right…which brings up another point: all these people building idealist products need to stop selling out to investors and acquiring companies.

The recent news about Imgur violating its original purpose of being the anti-photobucket image host for Reddit is the same thing, and even worse: Imgur was bootstrapped.

A founder can’t be said to have an idealist perspective if they sell their idealist platform to the highest bidder.

Jack Dorsey also comes to mind.

[nullc]

hah. For Dorsey the point that happened was when he made it public, I believe he's said he regretted that! :)

But I think the invocation of imgur brings up a good point. Was what we believed imgur to be ever actually economically viable? They were "bootstrapped" but $40 million in 2013, back before almost all of their impact.

At least some of the funded things that 'sell out' were just never viable to begin with.

It's far from clear to me that reddit couldn't have become more like Wikipedia-- driven by its community and funded through public support-- but there are lots of things that we could decry for violating their purpose that I think couldn't exist economically in their original more public-spirited form.

I find myself wondering more how often alternatives that are viable but just a little less good are driven out of the market or prevented from ever being created by funded alternatives which aren't viable... leaving us stuck on a bait and switch tread-mill while the services we actually need die for lack of support.