553
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2023
553 points (98.8% liked)
Malicious Compliance
20 readers
1 users here now
People conforming to the letter, but not the spirit, of a request. For now, this includes text posts, images, videos and links. Please ensure that the “malicious compliance” aspect is apparent - if you’re making a text post, be sure to explain this part; if it’s an image/video/link, use the “Body” field to elaborate.
======
-
We ENCOURAGE posts about events that happened to you, or someone you know.
-
We ACCEPT (for now) reposts of good malicious compliance stories (from other platforms) which did not happen to you or someone you knew. Please use a [REPOST] tag in such situations.
-
We DO NOT ALLOW fiction, or posts that break site-wide rules.
======
Also check out the following communities:
!fakehistoryporn@lemmy.world !unethicallifeprotips@lemmy.world
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
No, he wouldn't. He would say continuing to visit a site you are protesting against isn't a protest at all.
This is just incorrect.
What you are describing is a boycott. And it's probably true that that's the most powerful thing a normal user can do against reddit.
But mods can do much more by messing with their sub. In terms of headache caused.
They're driving away the holdouts by making the content useless. I think that's better than just leaving, burn it down on your way out.
He’d be all for both, but he certainly likes malicious compliance as protest when feasible.