This isn't a ban, it's a 3 day suspension. And we don't know what content was upvoted, or why it was a against Reddit policy. We do know, however, that Reddit indeed has policies about acceptable content, and most of us seem to agree they're fairly reasonable. So I don't understand the use of the scare quotes in the title.
Why exactly should an upvote, which is publicly visible approval, be different than a comment? I mean... they're both content posted to the site. It's not unreasonable that they be subject to the same rules.
Is the outrage here that votes are supposed to be "anonymous" and this feels like an unmasking of something people felt more comfortable doing "in private"? Is that something we want to protect per se?
This seems like more outrage than meat, honestly. I'd really like to know what the comment was before deciding.
Well for one it makes every user individually responsible for identifying content that breaks the rules, and this is very hard given Reddit's history of arbitrarily enforcing the rules.
The title wasn't meant to be a scare. The quote from Reddit is "against out policies" which was changed to "against their policies". I believe that's fair. And they already announced that these bans will be permanent in the announcement way back (see other comment for link)
Why exactly should an upvote, which is publicly visible approval, be different than a comment? I mean... they're both content posted to the site. It's not unreasonable that they be subject to the same rules.
Is the outrage here that votes are supposed to be "anonymous" and this feels like an unmasking of something people felt more comfortable doing "in private"? Is that something we want to protect per se?
This seems like more outrage than meat, honestly. I'd really like to know what the comment was before deciding.