As I recall... a little history on feminism's SPLC claims

This post is actually a fleshed-out version of one of my responses in a skype conversation. In writing it, I realized that this particular bit of reddit's history hasn't been written down by anyone, so I thought I'd put it here. The following is from my memory.  

When the conflict between reddit feminists and /r/mensrights started, neither /r/mensrights nor /r/feminism had many subscribers. Reddit itself wasn't all that big yet. When it was new, its format was slightly different from the way it is now. Originally, links could be posted without choosing a subreddit. They were there, but they were not the focus for the site. They were for specialized posting when the link in question might not be fitting for general posting to the front page... but if you wanted to just post to reddit.com, you could. Both /r/feminism and /r/mensrights were created during that time, when subreddits were basically a side gig.

Contrary to feminist claims about men's issues discussion, it's been functional from the beginning. When /r/mensrights was new there was discussion about things like the Innocence Project, Dr. Farrell's writing, Murray Strauss's work, Erin Pizzey's work, etc. That was true even before AVFM had the readership or visibility in the movement that it has now. It took time for the staff to build up a body of sourced writing, and during that time it was just one among many blogs with sourced writing, all of which were regularly linked and cited in posts and comments on /r/mensrights. Discussion in the subreddit made it a communication hub for different groups of MRAs, where sources of information were offered, issues discussed, theories shared and evaluated, conclusions drawn, and even some real world activism planned. And while reddit's feminist presence divided itself among a plethora of heavily moderated subreddits (which feminist sub moderators have since labeled "the fempire,) for the longest time, men's issues discussion remained open, but centered firmly in /r/mensrights, leading to the faster and larger growth of that subreddit.

Feminists became upset that information contradicting their narrative was being shared and discussed in /r/mensrights. In fact, they didn't like any of what was going on in the subreddit, and some reddit feminists took it upon themselves to put a stop to it.

They began attacking /r/mensrights in a few different ways. Concern trolling complete with shaming tactics began immediately. There were a lot of women who seemed to think visiting the sub to state their disapproval would shame these unruly guys into silence, so there were actual lecture posts.

I wish today that I'd archived them, because it's hard to go back more than a few years on reddit, and some of those posts were really comical. One chick took the Nurse Ratched approach and demanded to know what our mothers would think if they knew "what we were doing in this subreddit." What I did eventually do was spend a little time archiving into a post titled "For the record" a set of links that includes concern troll posts and comments, manipulative efforts, and posts that appear to have been brigaded (targeted by other subreddits for vote or discussion manipulation). I'm not working on that as a project any more, having sampled a pretty good sized window in time, but if you look at today's posts on /r/mensrights, I'm sure you'll probably see some of the same things I noted during the creation of that archive.

Another form of attack was to make a sockpuppet account and post something positive that would garner emphatic responses, then edit it, changing to something that made the existing comments look misogynistic. That would then be archived and the archive of the edited post presented elsewhere on reddit as evidence of rampant misogyny in the sub. The mods of /r/mensrights had to employ a bot created by another redditor to archive posts so that there would be an accurate record when those accusations were made.

There were two results of this: One, the admins did temporarily ban /r/mensrights in its early stages, and we had to argue for it to be reinstated (it obviously was,)... and two, reddit was so inundated with complaints about posts and comments being edited to make responding comments look bad (in multiple subreddits) that they took user suggestions to denote edits. Posts and comments edited after the first 60 seconds are now marked with an asterisk, so now while you do have a chance to fix formatting, nobody can use editing to gaslight their commenters.

At the same time, there was a discussion among reddit's feminists about writing to the SPLC and asking them to declare men's rights activists a hate movement (referred to as "the MRA" because they apparently didn't know the "A" stood for Activists and not something like "Association.")

The SPLC article that feminists now cite as a declaration that the MRM is a hate movement came out shortly after that spate of edit-based gas-lighting and the reddit discussion. The speech it describes as hateful and misogynistic could just about only be what was presented after editing those posts.

Now, the SPLC itself is just a mouthpiece for the American left, for whom identity politics represents a major cash cow... and though they didn't apply the requested label, I believe the article is evidence that the organization was influenced by those demands from reddit feminists.

Even when the SPLC didn't do what feminists were asking, feminists immediately began citing the article to back the claim that the organization had labeled men's rights "a" hate group. They did that so quickly that I suspect we weren't even on the SPLC's radar until feminists started complaining about us, and that feminists have been bent on that goal (using the "hate group" label to discredit our advocacy) from the first time they heard of us.

Letter to Reddit's admins on the subject of #RedditRevolt

Sent using this link from /r/reddit, an archived subreddit for which the admins are moderators.

There are a number of reasons why I have been less and less active on Reddit during the past few years. Ellen Pao personified some of them, and I'm happy to see her go, but Reddit parting ways with her is only a step, not the whole road to recovery.   
   
I started using this site because I found it to be an effective and fun communication tool with which I could reach out to others who have similar interests. The ability to communicate openly and share information with a widespread user base was and is very valuable to me. Early on, under account names now defunct because I expressed political opinions someone didn't like, I made personal connections that never would have happened had the site not existed. I formed friendships with people all over the world. I discovered whole communities with a variety of interests and opinions, and a place for discussion and debate that helped me expand my knowledge and sharpen my critical thinking skills and as a result, evolve my whole outlook on life.    
   
And then something terrible happened.       
    
I watched you reduce Reddit's usefulness and comfortable openness with the addition of censorship tools armed and executed with political bias. I've seen you shadowban users for expressing disapproved opinions. I've seen you quietly eclipse or even delete discussions about disapproved topics. Simply put, I've watched the tools purportedly created to protect the site from spam get exploited as silencing tools to "protect" the site from open, meaningful discussion that might lead to conclusions which don't jive with a specific worldview.        
   
I've seen you selectively enforce rules of conduct depending on the political affiliation of the accused. I've seen you refuse to communicate with subreddit moderators, so that they cannot inform their subscribers on how to use the site without falling afoul of your increasingly limiting biases. I've seen you use arbitrary labeling to excuse banning links to small news sites based on whether or not they align with a specific worldview. Seeing you ban users for linking to news and research published on sites against which you have a political bias has been very disturbing. It indicates a sense of entitlement to manipulate public opinion by limiting what can be presented on a widely used discussion hub. You couldn't find a better way to destroy faith in site admins than these behaviors. This makes the site look unprofessional to the point of appearing as a fly-by-night operation.
   
Pao was a problem, but she wasn't THE problem. The censorship, the unequal application of site rules and site disciplinary measures, and the constant flouting of user interests in favor of arrogantly telling us what we should want and what we should like all started before she came to Reddit. Mistreating your users and mods is why #RedditRevolt exists. Firing one of your most popular employees because she wouldn't do something unethical was the last straw. Please ask Victoria Taylor to come back. She didn't deserve what was done to her and your consumers, the users of the site, are outraged at the way she was treated.
   
No matter who you put in the driver's seat, if your site stays on the road you've chosen there are many of us who will never be on board with you. We won't adopt a particular worldview if it becomes the only one permitted on Reddit. We'll abandon the site as the sinking ship it is, and go to one of many others which are available, or we will create our own, and because many of us have learned from #GamerGate's example, we can and will take the site's ad revenue with us.    
   
Political bias in site administration takes the social out of social networking. If you want to limit Reddit to just another of several social sites dominated by one small, ideologically restricted portion of the population, you're doing it right. You won't grow, but you'll have a nice, comfortable echo chamber in which to feel more influential than you can actually be in the environment you've created.    
    
If you want growth in user interest and enthusiasm, higher ranking, and to once again be the social communication hub that you started out as in the beginning, drop the political censorship and let people talk... even the ones who say things you don't like... bring back Victoria, and bring some transparency and consistency into your relationship with your consumers.     
   
State the site's rules clearly and make them unmistakable, so they will be easy to follow, and apply them evenly. Do not have or use "unwritten" rules. If it's unwritten, it's not a rule. It is unfair to all of your users and creates a hostile environment when you invent "rules" on the spot as an excuse to shadowban. And don't use your own rules against vote manipulation as a means of vote manipulation. We do notice when you do that.            
    
Don't feel that labeling some news & information sites "not journalistic" because they're small or you don't identify with their area of coverage justifies censoring links to them. That only creates an environment that is hostile to anyone wanting to discuss issues and concepts largely covered by media that isn't mainstream. People are capable of reading, assessing, and debating information presented with these links. Denying your users the choice is tantamount to treating us like we're too stupid to form our own opinions.     
   
Don't make yourselves unavailable to users who contact you, especially subreddit moderators. Don't make your subreddit moderators constantly beg for important information on site administration, rules, maintenance, and updates, especially given the amount of work many of them do without expecting anything in return. You are mistreating valuable unpaid volunteers. Nobody should have to tell you how unprofessional that is, or how unwise.    
    
That's it; all we're asking for is some transparency, and fair treatment of all of your employees, volunteers, and consumers. Those are not difficult requests to fulfill. Reddit doesn't have to sink because of this conflict. It can become better, stronger, and more stable. It's up to you, admins. If you tighten your grip, you'll choke Reddit to death. If you make it functional, unbiased, and open, you'll have the user base you want. We're all waiting to see which road you'll choose.

To be honest, for a long time I stopped bothering to write to Reddit's administrators because they have a long-standing habit of not listening, but right now they seem to be possibly inclined to it.

Am I holding my breath for a result?

Not at all. However, the only chance at salvaging the site is if even the most frustrated Redditors are willing to give it a shot, communicate our complaints to the administrators, and allow them a chance to fix things.
They're going to have to decide whether they want a social popular, influential bookmarking/networking site, or an echo chamber where they keep tight control on discussion while keeping their volunteers and their consumers largely in the dark about site administration. It's their job to try to fix things, but it's our job to communicate what we want to see, and whether or not the changes they're making are satisfactory. It's my hope that other redditors will also write to the admins, letting them know that the desire for transparency, fair treatment, and unbiased administration (and the reinstatement of Victoria Taylor) is a widely held interest.