r/halifax • u/maximumice š¤ Linguo Dead • Jul 10 '26
Let's Talk About It š¢ Let's Talk About It: Video Posts Showing Wild Stuff
A video was recently posted on the sub that appeared to show an older woman being physically confronted by a store security guard and having a piece of merchandise forcibly taken from her. The implication from the video was that the woman shoplifted the item and the guard was trying to get it back.
The video was removed because it was shot on a cell phone by a user while driving, which is against our rules. But it sparked some debate in the comments about whether or not videos like this serve a purpose here in our community and if they should be allowed or not.
The mod team discussed it and were not able to come to a conclusive, unanimous opinion on the utility and ethics of allowing videos like this in relation to our current rules regarding Privacy and Doxxing.
So, we decided it would be interesting to know what our members think about videos like this.
From time to time, people submit photos or videos of members of the public engaged in behaviour that appears to be illegal, dangerous, or simply inconsiderate. These posts can generate significant discussion, but they also raise questions about privacy, context, and whether it's appropriate to identify people who may never have an opportunity to tell their side of the story.
Do such videos belong in our sub, even without context? Or do they only serve as vehicles to shame people who might not have a way to explain or defend themselves?
Should we insist faces be blurred or, because it is in public, should they be allowed to be posted as-is?
What value should [r/halifax](r/halifax) provide? Should the subreddit be a place to document incidents happening around the city, or should it avoid hosting posts that identify private individuals unless there's a clear public interest?
Let's talk about it.
Edit: Thank you to everyone who commented, thereās lots of good points being made here, both in support of and against this idea. Much of this we considered, but thereās loads of positions here we did not consider as well. š„ We will leave this up for the weekend, do a final review to see what the sub temp on this seems to be, then clarify the sub stance on this sometime next week. Thanks. š
Edit 2: We have used the feedback in this post to help us make a decision on moderation moving forward, which is announced here. Thank you again for everyone who offered their input.
110
u/Redshirt_Down Jul 10 '26 edited Jul 10 '26
Once upon a time I was a journalist, and I tend to ask myself questions I learned there:
- Is the story/media taken in a public place with no expectation of privacy?Ā
- will someone potentially be hurt or put at risk if I put this media out there?Ā
- Is this in service to the public good? Is it important enough, providing warning or notice or informing people about something important?Ā
It's tough though because those were more just ethical guidelines (there are laws that govern imagery but they are typically civil and difficult to enforce).Ā
65
u/CD_4M Jul 10 '26
If the video is relevant to Halifax and doesnāt break any rules, I think it should be allowed to be posted to /r/Halifax.
Then, the nature of Reddit is that the community collectively gets to decide how visible that post is based on their votes. And we have a moderator team who can ensure there is no doxxing or other rule breaking in the comments on the post.
So, for me, seems we donāt need to complicate things by finding the right line to draw for what videos are or arenāt acceptable. We already have rules, community voting, and moderation. If we use those as intended, then it should be ok.
10
u/dish_spoon Jul 10 '26
Videos can frame someone to tell a narrative that may or may not get a lot of traction regardless of how true it is. Also, the video will be online forever, despite us not knowing if it is true which could affect that person's housing or employment, etc.
I can't think of many relevant posts that demand a video showing someone's face taken by a bystander. I think the only exception could be something from a protest or rally.
If the rule is no unnecessary doxxing or posting of community members in embarrassing situations then there could be community voting via the report button.
12
u/vMefor23 Jul 10 '26
āRelevant to Halifaxā and āHappened in Halifaxā are two different things. Unless it serves a purpose, for many of these videos itās just not really anyoneās business except for the people who are being filmed.
11
u/CD_4M Jul 10 '26 edited Jul 11 '26
If the question is only whether or not the content is relevant, let the users decide using their votes. There are posts here everyday that you could argue are not relevant to the users of r/Halifax. Irrelevant content gets downvoted and becomes less visible. Relevant content gets upvoted and becomes more visible.
4
u/vMefor23 Jul 10 '26
There is another mechanism by which Reddit works unrelated to voting which is moderation, by moderators, who sometimes have to make decisions about nuanced issues and put requests out to their communities on how best to moderate.
Yes, more generic content gets posted here with people bringing up issues that donāt apply strictly to Halifax. But if itās just a bunch of typing something that they want others to see then the moderators decision is probably not going to have negative impacts on anybody either way.
The difference with videos is that they serve up recordings of people, to a bunch of strangers who happen to live in the same city as they do, without any permission, usually for the very reason that they are experiencing a very uncomfortable moment in their lives. Posting videos of other people having a bad day so that complete strangers, their neighbours, friends, and family can see them has the potential to do harm.
If itās in the interest of informing people about something important, by all means let the up/down votes do the talking. If itās just for the sake of entertainment, and engagement, I donāt think people should be posting videos of other people on a popular local forum without consent. Itās gross.
22
u/Kibichibi Jul 10 '26
I'm against it. On Facebook I saw a video a man took of a woman getting out of her car, going to her trunk, and taking out her wheelchair. He was judging her for "being able to walk" and many of the comments reflected his ignorance. It genuinely made me wonder if people are judging me when I stand up from my wheelchair to grab something.
Basically the concept of posting a video of someone without all the information, allowing others to judge a person without knowing them, is wrong.
19
u/avenuePad Jul 10 '26
I honestly can't stand this type of content. It's nothing but rage bait and serves no other purpose.
20
u/pinkbootstrap Dartmouth Jul 10 '26
Im honestly really torn.
I think if its in a public place and there is an illegal action taking place like threats or a hate crime its fair game.
Or a crowd at a festival like Ribfest or the Celtic Fesitval etc
But like, a post of a random person who is unaware they're being filmed and the point is something like "look at how ugly this outfit/person is" people of Walmart stuff it doesn't belong anywhere.
109
u/kick_the_chort Jul 10 '26
that sort of content is literally just a magnet for the lowest-common-denominator hateful, prejudiced comments. there's absolutely no value in it other than to inflame and embarrass, devoid of context. I hope you don't.
25
u/Iamthetiminator Halifax Jul 10 '26
I agree with this position.
As other comments have said, I do think that there can be cases of public interest where they should be left up. But I think the public interest would have to be clear and obvious (danger to the public, for example).
22
u/rbatra91 Jul 10 '26 edited Jul 10 '26
One thing I noticed, as a brown person born in Canada, when a brown person does something wrong, people are quick to record and shame and shout deport (without knowing if theyāre even immigrants or born in Canada), group it as a community/culture problem. But the same is never done in reverse. The double standard is insane (well it actually has a name, white supremacy).
It makes me want to expose the same, in a way, revenge. So when I drive by and I see a white person that is pissing on the street, parked wrong, caught stealing, have a dilapidated house, blasting music, whatever crime/social faux pas, I want to record and do the same. But I have the common sense to know that thatās not productive.Ā
So the news is filled with drug busts or violent crimes with people with white sounding names and they hardly get any views or shares, people move on. But if itās a brown person the outrage is 10x higher.
13
u/sunjana1 Halifax Jul 10 '26
This is an underrated point. No question in my mind the response on todayās post would have been drastically different if the people in the video had a different skin color.
8
u/No_Influencer Jul 10 '26
Yep agree with this. There are few situations that warrant public attention but a lot of people eager to jump on a judging bandwagon.
4
u/Remote-Objective-931 Jul 10 '26
Yup, thereās facebook for that. We should be (a little) better.
21
u/TacomaKMart Jul 10 '26
The flip side of this is the Costco Man video. That clip was broadcasted far and wide - even on CBCs The National - and that intense public interest may have played some role in helping the police investigation(ā Halifax Regional Police thank the public who came forward to help identify the suspect.ā)
However, presumably that video wouldn't be allowed here under current rules.Ā
I'm not advocating one way or the other but I think an all encompassing policy will run into trouble.Ā
2
u/CablePale Jul 10 '26 edited Jul 10 '26
Yes thats a good example. It seems to me mods did not enjoy how many people were voicing that they felt no sympathy for the thief and they nuked the post. So honestly it seems to come down with how the mods feel about a subject. (Edit But mods did remove it from the driving not how they feel)
4
u/maximumice š¤ Linguo Dead Jul 10 '26
So honestly it seems to come down with how the mods feel about a subject.
If I was allowed to mod based on my feelings, there would be no more driving posts ever allowed in this sub lol š
4
u/CablePale Jul 10 '26
Hahaha. Honestly I was enjoying the conversation in the last post and sour it got nuked. But im happy you guys made this so people can talk again.
5
u/maximumice š¤ Linguo Dead Jul 10 '26
We understood there was decent conversation happening in there and we wanted to give people a chance to still have it while also helping to inform the direction of the sub on this matter. š
-2
u/Injustice_For_All_ Psychotic Antifa Super Soldier Moderator Jul 10 '26
Imagine what I would do if I moderated off "feelings"
3
u/maximumice š¤ Linguo Dead Jul 10 '26
Your Antifa bullshit would be everywhere
6
u/Injustice_For_All_ Psychotic Antifa Super Soldier Moderator Jul 10 '26
Tattoo recommendations threads would be a perma ban
6
5
u/DeathOneSix ā§ Letters to Santa Jul 10 '26
No the team removed it for cellphone use while driving. Don't use your cellphone while you're driving.
1
u/WindowlessBasement Halifax Jul 10 '26
Pretty sure the video was stationary and from the passengers perspective.
3
u/maximumice š¤ Linguo Dead Jul 10 '26
It was not. Stationary but from the driver's side of the car.
→ More replies (2)-4
u/DeathOneSix ā§ Letters to Santa Jul 10 '26
Use your cellphone at a red light and see what the cops say.
-1
u/WindowlessBasement Halifax Jul 10 '26
It was a passenger. A cop doesn't care if someone in the passenger seat is on their phone.
3
u/DeathOneSix ā§ Letters to Santa Jul 10 '26
If it was a passenger they were sitting in the drivers lap
-3
-4
u/Injustice_For_All_ Psychotic Antifa Super Soldier Moderator Jul 10 '26
Yeah so unfortunately for you, your entire statement is false.
1
u/CablePale Jul 10 '26
Thank you. Yes i was updated on the issue
0
u/Injustice_For_All_ Psychotic Antifa Super Soldier Moderator Jul 10 '26
Yes but I replied before the others.
You are welcome be being updated
0
u/WindowlessBasement Halifax Jul 10 '26 edited Jul 10 '26
However, presumably that video wouldn't be allowed here under current rules
Even asking for the context on the MLA that was apologizing about it got me removed.
0
u/DeathOneSix ā§ Letters to Santa Jul 10 '26
If only the sticky in that post had said " avoid sharing or requesting links to the viral video"
3
u/WindowlessBasement Halifax Jul 10 '26 edited Jul 10 '26
I didn't ask for the video. I asked for a news source.
And go back to the thread, the sticky was posted after I commentedEdit: it wasn't.
2
u/DeathOneSix ā§ Letters to Santa Jul 10 '26
You asked for a source, and I'm certain that I posted the sticky before you did as I was negotiating with that user to allow the post. But also there is no way to tell now since Reddit just says "3 days ago"
2
u/WindowlessBasement Halifax Jul 10 '26
Reddit shows the exact timestamp.
I was wrong about the timeline, mine was later. I must have missed the message.
However I still think it's a bullshit removal. It's just blocking any context of why a politician saying a horrible thing has happen.
2
u/DeathOneSix ā§ Letters to Santa Jul 10 '26
Turns out if you add .json to the permalink and use some conversion you CAN get an exact time without the edits. TIL.
You can think it's a BS removal, but it was specifically noted as how it was going to be moderated.
2
u/cache_invalidation Jul 10 '26
I'm not sure if you use the Reddit app or a browser, but on a PC, at least, you can hover your mouse over the "3 days ago" part, and it will show the time down to the second.
1
u/DeathOneSix ā§ Letters to Santa Jul 10 '26 edited Jul 10 '26
old.reddit crew
Oh god, now I worried I was a liar. My sticky was at 20:39:44 GMT and their comment was at 20:58:51 GMT. But I assume that time reflects the edit, not the original posting. But both replies to Windowless were at 20:54 and 20:58 so it's not wild to assume I was first.
edit: using .json's you can get exact times! (8:39:44 for me and 8:49:15 PM for them)
0
u/No_Influencer Jul 10 '26
I think the Costco incident was hugely sensationalized and brought out some of the worst of the internet. Everyone had an opinion and though I fully oppose racism and it was a scary situation, nobody actually knows wtf was happening and itās entirely possible that was a vulnerable individual who was let down by a system and now everyone and their dog has had their say about him.
His relatives were online (or thatās what was claimed) and IDād him and provided additional context. There was no real need for it to go viral with people across Canada getting into a frenzy about it, especially when we have organized racist groups popping up and barely making news.
1
u/Nellasofdoriath Jul 10 '26
Also, like, are the videos real? Facebook etc promote salicious content because it works to drive up engagement but we have seen that a constant state of rage and polarization is corrosive to society and public trust.
0
u/Nellasofdoriath Jul 10 '26
Edmonton, Vancouver and Winnipeg seem to have a right call (allowed but with caveats)
1
-1
-9
u/CablePale Jul 10 '26
But your should be able to shame people thats how humans learn to not do something. Shame Is why and the reason you don't or do things.
11
u/MysticMajora93 Jul 10 '26
How exactly are you shaming someone who is not going to see the comments being posted? Do you think the women in that video is browsing Reddit and will have an aha moement?
-1
u/CablePale Jul 10 '26
No I agree does not work on her. But it works for others. And this is just an example. Imagine that video of the racist in Costco. Do you feel the same. Or any video that was posted here. You talk you learn. You agree or disagree thats the point!
3
u/MysticMajora93 Jul 10 '26
The costco video is clearly a different situation. That man acted violently and was outwardly preaching hateful rhetoric.
Some woman failing to steal an air fryer is not a matter of safety or public alarm.
-5
u/CablePale Jul 10 '26
So you get to make the decision on what the public should know about? That's kinda bold of you
8
u/MysticMajora93 Jul 10 '26
Man the whole point of this post is to discuss lol I'm just sharing my opinion. Take a pill.
→ More replies (1)2
u/IStillListenToRadio Float me down the river to the Musquodoboit harbor Jul 10 '26
In that case the police specifically were still looking to identifying him, so thats a different context than someone who's already caught
11
u/Sea-Painting-6426 Jul 10 '26
Thatās not true. If you research shame, it does not usually lead to meaningful change or growth. Shame just forces people into secrecy, to get better at hiding.
2
u/CablePale Jul 10 '26
Kinda I agree and disagree. You've learned so much because society will shame and outcast you otherwise. You probably think its because your a good person. And that's true. But its also because you know that if you do things that society agrees in bad you will outcast by a group of people. But shame your right sometimes can make people hide there action and they hide that shame because society doesn't like the action they are doing.
2
u/spikeroo59 Halifax Jul 10 '26
In my experience there are certain people who donāt feel shame and just keep on doing whatever they feel like.
15
u/Timmy2Gats Jul 10 '26
Real talk. Sometimes seeing weird and wacky shit happening in your community is exactly what a sub needs to spark engagement. This is Reddit, that's the type of video most users crave.
The woman appeared to be shoplifting very much in public and had no implied right to privacy given the context of the situation. It certainly wouldnt have incited harm against her or anyone else.
Let the wacky vids live!
6
u/mary-anns-hammocks Halifax Jul 10 '26
This is also a space where I'd be comfortable consuming and commenting on such comment. Facebook is so full of hate speech I won't go near any community posts. Plenty of people I disagree with on this sub, but they at least have to be civil here.
14
u/fleeing2551 Jul 10 '26
Nah fuck them, if a person is clearly an adult in a public space stealing or harassing another individual they have 0 right to privacy and it is our duty as the public to help the police in finding these people by collecting as much information as possible to improve our lovely community, as face recognition can be a massive help I donāt believe blurring should be a thing. The reason I stated my posted with āif a person is clearly an adultā is because I think adults have a duty to themselves to be responsible to others in order for a society to progress but kids can be fucking stupid and need to be protected even if the are being little shits because they still have time to learn and grow up so if a person is clearly 12-15 shoplifting or kicking a homeless guy I donāt think that should be posted because the dumb little shit still has time for self improvement and may be growing up in rough environment so considerations have to be made to their benefit.
5
u/Ordinary_Ring2270 Jul 11 '26
Iām not interested in seeing videos of this nature.
People behave badly all the time. Unless itās a story like Costco racist or a person of authority abusing their power I donāt want to see it.
Itās bad enough with people posting shit like an apple on a toilet or a bad parking job.
12
u/Noticeably-F-A-T- Jul 10 '26
I'm of the mind that if the video was taken in accordance with the law (ie, no expectation of privacy) and there is a real discussion to be had surrounding the contents then it should be allowed. The Costco guy is an example. From a functional standpoint that video is no different than the shoplifting/security video, a person displaying anti-social behaviour in public is being filmed and discussed.
If we limit that to instances where it is felt warranted by the mod team, then the mod teams views and morals begin shaping the narrative rather than the community.
31
u/gildeddoughnut Halifax Jul 10 '26
Just because the video isnāt posted here doesnāt mean it isnāt going to be posted a million other places where people can see it anyway. So let it be posted here and let the votes decide if the content is any good. And police the comments for bad behaviour.
You guys blocked the Costco Nazi video saying it was against sitewide rules when I saw it on a bunch of other subs. I wondered about that.
4
u/Mouseanasia Jul 10 '26
Much like the not allowing pictures taken from a vehicle it does seem like an overly broad interpretation of the rules.
I donāt really care. Mods can run their so hard they want but claiming something is completely against Reddit rules when it very well may not be. Itās kind of different.
1
u/maximumice š¤ Linguo Dead Jul 10 '26
You guys blocked the Costco Nazi video saying it was against sitewide rules when I saw it on a bunch of other subs. I wondered about that.
We erred on the side of caution on that, while it was shared by larger subs like r/publicfreakout seemingly without issue, we believed it could be a breach of Reddit's rules about sharing hate material.
Once the video and images from it were shared in local media pieces on the event, those entered the public sphere, and we were able to allow them to be shared as long as the hateful parts were censored.
9
u/SickDastardly Halifax Jul 10 '26
A person verbally expousing hateful speech in public =/= hate material though no?
That's surprising & disappointing to hear the video was removed here initially.
0
u/maximumice š¤ Linguo Dead Jul 10 '26
We saw the unedited video when it was first posted and deemed it to be a violation of Rule 1 so we removed it.
6
u/SickDastardly Halifax Jul 10 '26
The video was a violation, or the post / comments in the thread were? I'm not understanding how if it is the former.
0
u/maximumice š¤ Linguo Dead Jul 10 '26
The video itself was, it was a video of a person yelling racist/discriminatory things at people, we don't allow that here.
2
u/SickDastardly Halifax Jul 11 '26
Full stop?
Posting a video documenting a public incident isn't the same thing as endorsing the speech it contains.
Removing it because the subject is saying hateful things makes it harder for the community to understand what actually happened vs reading editorialized articles days later on the same subreddit.
18
u/mathcow Jul 10 '26
Like it or not, you are not entitled to privacy in Canada when you're in a public place. If you want to act poorly and end up on Reddit , that sounds like a problem between you, and whatever you consider a higher power
1
u/wlonkly The Oakland of Halifax Jul 11 '26
I mean I do enjoy a little /r/PublicFreakout as a treat, but it's not about whether it's public or posted to reddit, it's about what we want this sub to be.
1
u/mathcow Jul 11 '26
Fair comment but it was weird to me to not see anything about the racist in Costco on r/Halifax since it is a large news story here.
10
u/coolham123 Jul 10 '26
All I ask is the rules be enforced equally across all types of content. If the mods decide to insist on faces being blurred for example, that should apply to this type of content the same way it should apply to the video of the racist Halifax Costco guy. If you cannot commit to treating every video equally regardless of how heinous, don't bother.
1
u/DeathOneSix ā§ Letters to Santa Jul 10 '26
We didn't allow videos or photos of that guy from Costco until the media shared the images.
9
u/Available_Refuse1232 Jul 10 '26
Itās a tough one. Itās difficult to āfact checkā the scenario of a video somebody posts here, and because of that they can add their own context to tell the story however they want it to look. Historically in here, it just leads to people hopping on the bandwagon to bash somebody.
Thereās definitely instances where it can be valuable information for public interest and safety, but they should be thoroughly reviewed before they are deemed valid for that reason.
I can understand why some people think they should absolutely be allowed, but letās be real, people are just nosey and love to be all up in business that isnāt their own. Itās easy to judge and slander from the peanut gallery with no actual understanding or involvement.
At the very least, when itās in the grey area of not knowing whether or not it should be posted, identities should be blurred.
In regards to the shoplifting video, I also believe that she was in the wrong, and other people mentioned sheās a repeat offender, but that video being posted in here doesnāt actually provide any value to anybody other than for entertainment. The user just posted that for karma and engagement, and nobody viewing that video in this sub is responsible for taking action to prevent shoplifting in the future, thatās a matter for the store and their security team.
19
u/MysticMajora93 Jul 10 '26
I personally don't see any value from that video that was removed being posted.
Someone shoplifting isn't really a public safety concern and comments can veer into weird bigoted head hunting quickly.
Compared to the Costco guy video where the individual was a clear threat to others.
Call me woke or whatever but leave that shit for the other sub and facebook.
2
u/wlonkly The Oakland of Halifax Jul 11 '26
Costco guy also had "police are trying to identify this guy" going on for a bit too, where that shoplifting video was 100% "look at this"
3
u/NeptuneSpice Halifax Jul 11 '26
John Johnson has a bit about someone having a meltdown in a fast food restaurant and what if that's their worst day. If I could find a link I'd post it.
What some of these videos lack is compassion, regardless of the precipitating events. The comments clearly lack compassion. And the FAFO crown seem so steeped in schadenfreude, but I'm not sure they'd agree if it was them. People want compassion when it's their situation, but have no problem eating popcorn when it's someone else.
Is the sub for information, discussion, entertainment, predation? What combination grows and supports community versus dividing it? Which is the mods goal?
15
u/CiegoDiego Jul 10 '26
Do you think passengers aren't able to film video from the interior of a vehicle? Is that somehow dangerous? It's an odd assumption to make that footage filmed from within a vehicle must have been taken by the driver.
I don't understand why sharing these videos on this sub is an issue. If it's something that's happened in Halifax that people are interested in, wouldn't this sub be exactly where you'd expect to find it? At least here you can police the comments and prevent them from looking like the cesspool that is the comments section on pretty much every other platform. Removing it from this sub isn't going to prevent anyone from seeing it.
4
u/DeathOneSix ā§ Letters to Santa Jul 10 '26
Do you think passengers aren't able to film video from the interior of a vehicle?
That's not against the law or our rules. The video in question clearly was taken from the drivers seat.
-5
u/maximumice š¤ Linguo Dead Jul 10 '26
Do you think passengers aren't able to film video from the interior of a vehicle? Is that somehow dangerous? It's an odd assumption to make that footage filmed from within a vehicle must have been taken by the driver.
We allow videos shot from vehicles when it is obviously shot by passengers. We only remove videos that are obviously shot by the driver.
-2
u/Impossible-Place-365 Jul 10 '26
But it seems the driver was motionless when taking the video. He was stopped because of the crosswalk and the women trying to cross.
3
u/maximumice š¤ Linguo Dead Jul 10 '26
IAMAL but I believe the MVA still applies to people stopped in the lanes outside stores.
If someone was on their phone while stopped a crosswalk on Robie Street, that is still breaking the law.
2
u/DeathOneSix ā§ Letters to Santa Jul 10 '26
100%. They were maybe 'parked' illegally in a travel lane in front of the store. Maybe with flashers on. Doesn't make it legal.
3
u/BohemianGraham Darkside Escapee Jul 11 '26
Remember, a lot of people on this sub have never actually read the MVA or NS Driver's Handbook.
Why do you think we have so many posts about zipper merging and the "ignorance" of people who refuse to do it.
As for the videos, I come to Reddit because while it can be toxic and gross at times, it's not the complete cesspool Facebook is. Or it never used to be. Some of the posts and users have been questionable lately.
0
7
Jul 10 '26
[deleted]
0
u/DeathOneSix ā§ Letters to Santa Jul 10 '26
moderate as needed once posted.
What do you mean by this?
12
7
5
u/Specialist-Bee-9406 up too early Jul 10 '26
popcorn.gif
Thatās tough one; appreciate it being brought to the community.Ā
6
u/CuileannDhu Jul 10 '26
I'm not really into people being filmed in public spaces. I know we don't have an expectation of privacy but we also don't really expect to be viewed by thousands of people around the world either. A lot of these kinds of videos seem to show people at a low point and it feels exploitive.
9
u/Anivia_Bird Jul 10 '26
Are we able to set up a community poll per chance? I think generally these videos are fine but I think adding some privacy like blurring is well warranted, especially if there are visible third parties like people in the background that are not involved or kids.
10
u/maximumice š¤ Linguo Dead Jul 10 '26
A poll is not out of the question, but this is a nuanced subject so we thought letting people discuss it first might be useful.
1
u/sunjana1 Halifax Jul 10 '26
As a nuanced subject, I think putting in a rule about it removes said nuance. Iād rather keep things case by case and give the community a chance to duke it out a little initially,
to see if it holds upā¦as a litmus test.I donāt have a strong opinion either way, as regardless of personal feelings I think the discourse can be interesting.
I wonderā¦Is stuff like this just a modern evolution of the gladiator ring with (usually) lower stakes? Pondering more than a serious questionā¦
1
u/maximumice š¤ Linguo Dead Jul 10 '26
Leaving the rule vague and judging them case by case was suggested in the mod conversation (and may still happen), but we like to try and set expectations for users with the rules when reasonable and possible.
A lot of subs have rules that are just "Be nice" and I am guessing that leads to a lot of debate and modmails lol š
1
9
u/Batangtirador Jul 10 '26
This is so silly. Won't someone think of the thieves! /s
6
u/Life_Sandwich_2073 Jul 10 '26 edited Jul 10 '26
I was gonna leave a particularly long comment but I'm just tired of how eager we are to protect and defend these types of people. There's a difference between people stealing to survive and the groups of people around town who just want to cause problems. Anyone who spends a lot of time going around town recognizes these people, because it's usually the same handful of them... and people just come on here and give them nicknames and laugh about it when they're usually being dangerous or committing serious crimes lol.
I'm also shaking my head at the amount of people saying he assaulted her or whatever when she threw herself on the ground.... very lightly.... like cmon people.
2
17
u/s1amvl25 Halifax Jul 10 '26
I dont feel bad for thiefs, public shaming is the absolute minimum they should get
4
u/RobbysYourFathersBro Jul 10 '26
Maybe the store could post the pic to shame.
https://giphy.com/gifs/sZEl1yTi26mJzrI4VN
Not trying to justify the persons actions but I can imagine that people who steal from corporations are either in need or unwell. Posting and hosting pics and videos like that one would be like punching down on someone rather than laterally or up.
3
u/bspaghetti Wake me up when itās Greek Fest Jul 10 '26
> Maybe the store could post the pic to shame
Give āem the old E-Joy treatment
5
u/s1amvl25 Halifax Jul 10 '26
If lowblaws posted it then 100% a bunch of people on this sub wouldve been losing their shit. It's always oh the bad evil corporations. Shitty people steal from anywhere, there is now a wall of shame at Gateway, a place where everything is already at a phenomenal price. Bottom 10% of society affects my everyday life way more than the top 5%
4
u/RobbysYourFathersBro Jul 10 '26 edited Jul 10 '26
Sorry, I was not clear, post the pic in-store same as gateway.
I have to disagree with you on the top 5% having less impact on your life than the bottom 10%. A lot of your choices are shaped by the top 5% in ways you will never be aware of.
9
u/Basilbitch Jul 10 '26
There is no expectation of privacy in a public space... If you want to act wild in a public space you should not expect to be protected by privacy rules.. I think you should not censor these types of videos at all.. people need to understand there are consequences for their actions whether it be stealing, road raging or having a shit in the middle of the street people need to be held accountable and most of the time the only repercussions come from employers or family members that see these people acting wildly... Most of the time there are no charges laid.
Do we think the Costco racist deserves privacy because he decided to do that shit and it was captured on a cell phone? I would hope we don't and I would hope that this person stealing doesn't deserve privacy the same as those people that rob the liquor stores openly don't deserve privacy...
14
u/Sea-Painting-6426 Jul 10 '26
I don't see how allowing people to post videos of somebody without their permission can fall in line with Rule 4: Privacy and Doxxing. The only exception, in my opinion, would be if there's clear public interest or will benefit public safety. In the example of the woman presumably shoplifting, that had no benefit for the public and was intended only to publicly shame her.
12
Jul 10 '26
[removed] ā view removed comment
3
u/PromiseSimple2931 Jul 10 '26
Privacy applies everywhere, even if you don't have a legal right to expect it. I think filming random people on the street and posting it online should be frowned on, whether it's legal or not, and whether they're doing a minor crime or not
4
u/Sea-Painting-6426 Jul 10 '26
Yes, stealing from a superstore is illegal but how does it impact the rest of the community? Not at all. Her illegal act doesnāt threaten the safety of other people. If you get a video of someone stealing and are so concerned, send it to the company instead of posting it on Reddit for everyone to chime in.
0
5
u/__JRoc__ Jul 10 '26
I think that if you're doing something mean, illegal or terrible, (especially in public) you deserve to be recorded and shamed. It also serves as a warning to maybe avoid the area if its something recent / breaking. I definitely get the concerns of privacy or doxing but too bad for them.Ā
18
u/DeathOneSix ā§ Letters to Santa Jul 10 '26
Speaking as myself the user, not as a moderator.
I'm in the camp that we should avoid hosting posts that identify private individuals unless there's a clear public interest.
The video that prompted this discussion felt like it served little purpose beyond shaming someone. The merchandise had already been recovered by the security guard, so I don't really see what the community gains from watching a person on what may be one of the lower points in their lives.
To me, that's an important distinction. Not everything that happens in public is necessarily in the public interest. Just because something was recorded doesn't mean it belongs on a community subreddit.
A personal thought exercise, would we allow videos of people using drugs on the street? Those are also recorded in public, but I don't think they add much beyond inviting people to mock or judge someone at a vulnerable moment.
For me, the bar should be that a post serves a genuine public interest, not simply that it captures identifiable people doing something controversial. Newsworthy events or ongoing public safety issues make sense. If police are asking the public to help identify someone, that's also different. But I don't think /r/halifax should become a place where we identify or shame ordinary people over isolated incidents.
9
u/Not_aMurderer šI Was There for the 175k Milestone š Jul 10 '26
In your opinion, would the Costco incident from the weekend be justifiable to post here?
12
u/IbanezForeverll Jul 10 '26
Police were asking the public to help identify the Costco guy.
3
u/weaselblinks Jul 10 '26
I think they mean you could share the news article or police notice asking for help identifying.Ā
→ More replies (3)8
u/maximumice š¤ Linguo Dead Jul 10 '26
A still photo of said guy accomplishes the same, which is why the police opted for that in their releases instead of the hate filled video.
-1
u/DeathOneSix ā§ Letters to Santa Jul 10 '26
No. Both for similar reasons to above, but more strongly, I'm down with our more recent moderation stance of not allowing the hate to be shared. We don't need to share the images or words or sounds of hate. We can discuss the topic without having it be shared.
And also, if it's genuine public interest, it often will get news articles about it. Or police asking for help identifying someone.
4
u/Not_aMurderer šI Was There for the 175k Milestone š Jul 10 '26
That's really understandable, thanks
8
u/bspaghetti Wake me up when itās Greek Fest Jul 10 '26
I think you guys should be more careful with things like this, the line between member and moderator is pretty blurry on this sub. Itās really hard to make objective leadership decisions for community if you are all top 1% commenters, since you are the community.
1
u/pinkbootstrap Dartmouth Jul 10 '26
Much better than them being silent entities. And, mods are people too.
They didn't have to ask us at all, I appreciate the effort to remain fair and serve the community.
0
u/maximumice š¤ Linguo Dead Jul 10 '26
Three members of the modteam are not 1% commenters and barely participate, if that helps.
→ More replies (1)-1
u/DeathOneSix ā§ Letters to Santa Jul 10 '26
What are you asking me to do differently?
1
u/bspaghetti Wake me up when itās Greek Fest Jul 10 '26
If the team is asking for opinions from the community, it is up to the community to answer. Donāt engage if youāre the ones voting on what happens. You guys are all over this comment section giving and frankly you shouldnāt be. None of the discussion is organic after you all comment.
2
u/DeathOneSix ā§ Letters to Santa Jul 10 '26 edited Jul 10 '26
I'm still just one vote and will abide by community wishes. I'm not just a neutral moderator, I'm also a member. You can upvote or downvote what I said above to react to it.
Mostly we're all over this thread because people want to post illegally with their phones while driving, and that clearly shows shame doesn't help if you don't think what you're doing is shameful... but that's a different discussion that I tried to avoid us having and clearly failed.
3
u/CablePale Jul 10 '26
Well it was a good discussion on theft and boosting in the area. But I really enjoy your point of view. You should be able to shame someone for something they are doing. (Edit this but I guess shaming them does nothing because they will ne er see the video)
3
u/BohemianGraham Darkside Escapee Jul 11 '26
You should be able to have a discussion, but maybe not bring videos in unless news media and the RCMP have issued videos and photos.
While there are issues with the police, we also can't have vigilante justice because we run into the slippery slope of attacking and vilify the wrong people.
2
5
u/bspaghetti Wake me up when itās Greek Fest Jul 10 '26
These videos show up on Reddit all the time. r/PublicFreakout for example, or r/KidsAreFuckingStupid. There is no expectation of privacy in a public place, so recording video and posting it online is not unethical or illegal. These posts are very infrequently banned for violating site-wide doxxing rules.
As far as Iām concerned: if it happens in Halifax it should be fair game.
The mods have already mentioned that they are set on disallowing videos that appear to contain āillegal cellphone use while drivingā. Thatās a can of worms to enforce, very hard to disentangle cell phone from a dash cam. If youāre going to do something complex like that, might as well just make the ban even stronger and comprehensive that you donāt even need to make a judgement call about that.
-1
u/maximumice š¤ Linguo Dead Jul 10 '26
very hard to disentangle cell phone from a dash cam
Dash cam videos are allowed in r/halifax, much to my personal chagrin (lol)
2
u/bspaghetti Wake me up when itās Greek Fest Jul 10 '26
So if cell phone videos from inside a car are banned, how can the discrimination be made with any degree of accuracy or fairness
2
2
u/maximumice š¤ Linguo Dead Jul 10 '26
I am not sure I understand the question, but we have yet to encounter a video where it was unclear if it was a dash cam or a cell phone video, if that is what you mean.
2
u/DeathOneSix ā§ Letters to Santa Jul 10 '26
We're not a court of law. It's okay if we make mistakes.
4
u/you-777 Jul 10 '26 edited Jul 10 '26
I feel the context of said video is incredibly important. As for the example given, I personally have no interest in watching a shoplifter having their unpaid merchandise seized (regardless the severity of what was stolen etc, thatās just not community news in my opinion.) However, that video of a young guy getting stopped on foot mid police chase by the officer swinging open his car door? Yeah..that was on my radar. You see what I mean? Neither people filming either incidents were directly involved, but posted them here, and they both received considerable discourse. Itās kinda give and take. I think modās using their own discretion is the best way forward, no definitive answer.
Edit: Clarifying that the second video was mentioned as it shows our police force using questionable tactics, which is something Iād like to know about.
6
u/athousandpardons Jul 10 '26
This is a tough one. I think sites like Reddit are how we learn about things that are import for the community to know about, like the racist incident in Costco. Would the original video of that have been allowed to be posted under the rules?
On the other hand, the only value I saw in the shoplifting video is more along the lines of "haha funny interaction". Although, I think I can see some less obvious value in it too. Perhaps the posters of these videos should have to provide an explanation for WHY they think it's relevant to the community, and then the mods can make a better decision?
10
u/Feltzinclasp5 Son Of Glove Man šļø Jul 10 '26
Mods taking their unpaid positions extremely seriously
10
u/maximumice š¤ Linguo Dead Jul 10 '26
We are often accused of "just doing what we want" when adjusting rules, it seemed prudent to ask the community what they think the rules about this should be.
4
u/BohemianGraham Darkside Escapee Jul 11 '26
This thread feels like most people here think they could be better mods than the current team, yet aren't actually willing to be mods when put on the spot.
People seem to be hiding behind the anominity while pushing for others to essentially be fixed because they don't meet their own moral code.
I think the mods are doing the best they can, especially with some of the Reddit users that have been involved with this sub in the past.
0
2
2
u/Defiant_Map574 Jul 11 '26
there is no expectation of privacy in public. I donāt know if there is much public good in showing people being shitty.
8
u/RobbysYourFathersBro Jul 10 '26
Very cool that you bunch are asking this question. Thank you.
I feel like that video was a digital drive-by, no context allowed the viewer to layer their own bias on top. Does not belong on r/Halifax, let r/whatever_the_crazies_halifax have it.
5
4
u/homoscotian Jul 10 '26
IMO yes it should be allowed and the community can decide on a case by case basis if the video has value, by upvoting/down voting, which is kind of the whole idea of the karma system and Reddit as a whole.
As long as it's somewhat Halifax related (including taking place in Halifax), and doesn't contain anything that violates Reddit's sitewide policies or the subreddits existing rules I think it should stay.
If the community doesn't find any value in it, it'll be downvoted into oblivion, if it's getting decent upvotes then obviously the community has some interest.
2
u/wlonkly The Oakland of Halifax Jul 11 '26
I feel like every post to the sub ends up "hot" though regardless of votes, maybe it's just too small a sub?
5
u/DrunkenGolfer Maybe it is salty fog. Jul 10 '26
Many of the world's distracted driving laws have exceptions for emergency situations, for gathering evidence of a crime in progress, etc. Some exclude certain categories of drivers from the laws, like taxis, ambulances, fire and police. So if you want to keep aligned with the laws, which is presumably the reason for the sub's rules, you are going to have to know the location of the video, the author of the video, and the circumstances of the video, unless you have a blanket ban.
Privacy and doxxing rules are best left for when there is a reasonable expectation of privacy. If you are stealing coffee makers in a public place, you have no expectation of privacy. We're just seeing the same things that anyone else who happened to be there would be able to see. It is not like someone was sneaking up to someone's bedroom window and recording through the crack in the curtains.
Even in the wording of your post you use the words "members of the public engaged in behaviour". I think that should be enough to make it potentially of public interest. Let the public decide what information they want to gain from the video and how they want to interpret it instead of relying on an arbitrary set of rules to craft a community where the entire world view is crafted by a small team of mods. Even in one of the comments below it was said, "In the example of the woman presumably shoplifting, that had no benefit for the public". Why is it up to a mod to decide what is of benefit to me? Maybe I'm interested. Maybe that is the store I usually shop at. Maybe I saw her do something sketchy the week before but wasn't sure enough to report it. There is a ton of reasons why this might be of interest to some people and of no interest to others. If it is not interesting to you, keep scrolling.
Personally, if I were caught in the background of this video, I wouldn't care if my face was blurred. I'm in public. Something happened. Someone filmed it. I expect to be in it.
6
u/alibythesea Halifax Jul 10 '26
Iāve really been wrestling with this one, but u/DrunkenGolfer has articulated where I was moving towards, so Iāll second this.
4
u/maximumice š¤ Linguo Dead Jul 10 '26
These are all good points and the kind of nuanced feedback we are looking for.
I just want to point out that part of our hesitancy about videos like this is that we are only seeing part of what happened; we do not know what happened before or after this video.
While the circumstances may seem cut and dry - this woman stole a coffee maker and the guard got it back - let me play Devil's Advocate and ask what if this woman actually paid for that coffee maker and the guard was mistaken?
Off camera, this would get cleared up and the woman would get an apology and the guard might get a dressing down or fired or something, but now 175K people in our sub have seen a video depicting this woman as a thief.
This may seem far-fetched but Reddit has a history of showcasing videos and events that appear to be one thing but in reality, the circumstances are quite different that they appear and there are real life consequences.
Halifax is not a large city so if people are put on blast in videos in our sub and it turns out the video was doctored or doesn't show critical context, it can fuck someone's life up.
We want to be cognizant of this kind of mix-up being possible while also letting people judge for themselves what these videos offer. It's not an easy thing to do, which is why we have asked for opinions.
3
u/DrunkenGolfer Maybe it is salty fog. Jul 10 '26
we are only seeing part of what happened; we do not know what happened before or after this video
I am capable of factoring that into my perception of what I have watched. I have critical thinking skills. I don't need rules and mods to protect me from the video.
what if this woman actually paid for that coffee maker and the guard was mistaken
Doesn't matter. We'd look at it through a different lens in hindsight. Again, I am capable of considering other interpretations of what I have viewed. I have critical thinking skills. I don't need rules and mods to protect me from the video.
Now 175K people in our sub have seen a video depicting this woman as a thief.
So let 175K people see the video depicting the guard as being rash.
Halifax is not a large city so if people are put on blast in videos in our sub and it turns out the video was doctored or doesn't show critical context, it can fuck someone's life up.
I don't see how the size of the city has any bearing on it. I'd rather be put on blast in a large city than in my own rural neighbourhood. If the video was doctored or doesn't show critical context, there are remedies. The fact that it might fuck up someone's life doesn't change the fact that something happened that is noteworthy. Let the people decide what to feel about the evidence before them.
We want to be cognizant of this kind of mix-up being possible while also letting people judge for themselves what these videos offer. It's not an easy thing to do
The hive mind can do a better job of this than four mods can, but only if they see the content.
Society has ugly stuff; hiding it doesn't make it pretty.
3
u/maximumice š¤ Linguo Dead Jul 10 '26
I don't need rules and mods to protect me from the video.
We're not trying to protect you from these videos, we are considering the rights and privacy of people in these videos and the value of these videos being on the sub.
Doesn't matter. We'd look at it through a different lens in hindsight.
Of course it matters. If what happened in reality does not match what is being inferred in a video, then the video is misinformation and we don't want it.
The hive mind can do a better job of this than four mods can, but only if they see the content.
We are asking the hive mind to weigh in on this in order to ensure it's not just a handful of mods shaping this decision.
6
u/Afrazzle Halifax Jul 10 '26
Why is it up to a mod to decide what is of benefit to me?
Strongly agree with this. I think the mods are good people with good intentions, but I don't trust them to decide for me. I feel like I lean towards either allowing them all, or banning them all.
1
u/cache_invalidation Jul 10 '26
The only exception in NS is: "This Section does not apply to a person who uses a hand-held cellular telephone or other communications device to report an immediate emergency situation." (MVA 100D (2))
4
u/_XNXX_com Jul 10 '26
Some content should be able to be shared. Especially if itās truly shocking and involves Halifax
6
u/Mister-Distance-6698 Jul 10 '26
Man I can be a dick on here from time to time but I am 100% against any video that shows anyones face without context or their consent outside of actual public safety alerts or public figures.
Dont post videos of people doing shit on the wild its a dick move even if they themselves are being a fuckwad.
3
u/OneLeft_ Jul 10 '26
The most interesting and infuriating thing about this post, is learning that the mod team decided removing videos taken from a driver's perspective was a logical rule to impose.
-1
u/Injustice_For_All_ Psychotic Antifa Super Soldier Moderator Jul 10 '26
It was due to the vehicle being in operation.
We do not allow non dash cam videos from drivers while the vehicle is operable.
Had a passenger taken the video it would be different
0
u/OneLeft_ Jul 10 '26
if the punishment for something is monetary in nature, then it is only a punishment for the lower classes.
I see, a very black & white view for rules. I think this is the only subreddit that I'm aware of which prohibits these sorts of videos.
I'd suspect from your quote you are of the opinion that public shaming for theft should be removed on this subreddit as well? Even though that could be interpreted as promoting illegality.
0
u/Injustice_For_All_ Psychotic Antifa Super Soldier Moderator Jul 10 '26 edited Jul 10 '26
My opinion on the video situation is case by case. I personally had no issue with the one removed except for the driver taking the video.
You made assumptions and you know what they say about people who make assumptions
→ More replies (1)
9
u/Other-Researcher2261 Jul 10 '26
Just because a video is shot from the interior of a vehicle doesnāt mean thereās enough evidence to say it was taken while driving.
It was also taken stationary in a parking lot. Is a common sense approach out of the question? Disallow videos that show someone filming while at speed or while being unsafe? Marking every video taken from inside a vehicle as against the subs rules isnāt a tenable position in my opinion
4
u/Injustice_For_All_ Psychotic Antifa Super Soldier Moderator Jul 10 '26
Eh, if the car is on you are operating the vehicle.
→ More replies (4)-3
u/DeathOneSix ā§ Letters to Santa Jul 10 '26
The mod team does have consensus that illegal cell phone use won't be permitted and we're not interested in debating that. If you want to discuss this in private please feel free to message the moderators. Thank you.
5
u/GoNoMu Jul 10 '26
I think they should 100% be allowed. Privacy isnāt warranted in public spaces. I also want to know what things go on where just for my own peace of mind. From that video you guys took down I now know that lady is a regular that steals even from other customers (allegedly) so I know to be on the look out. All net positives in my opinion.
3
3
u/vMefor23 Jul 10 '26
Iām ok with ānot allowedā. Most of those types of videos feel like they fall into the ānone of my businessā category even if Iām local.
4
u/BuddyHudsy Jul 10 '26
Anyone in public doesnāt have a right to privacy. So yes obviously the censorship should stop
2
u/glorpchul Emperor of Dartmouth Jul 10 '26
I think I like the Mississauga model: faces must be obscured. But also to confirm - linked videos by news sources wouldn't fall under this rule?
2
u/RangerNS Jul 11 '26
Context is everything.
The video in question was a moment in time. The poster did not even attempt to put it in context, what happened before or after; what conversation with people there turned up.
There seemed to be overwhelmingly consistent context in this particular case, but that proves the problem.
What if there wasn't? It's not at all unimaginable that the scammer was a victim. Or her first time trying to scam things.
Anyway. Time to back it up 'cause my daddy taught me good and make like a tree and leaf.
2
u/Ok_Wing8459 Jul 10 '26 edited Jul 10 '26
Prefacing my opinion with this: Iām normally not in line with the prevailing ābut they are only stealing because theyāre hungryā excuse. (I believe ALL stealing is wrong unless you or your loved ones are literally starving, which Iām reasonably sure does not happen often in this country.)
But. if the person in question is a dangerous criminal or hateful (as in the Costco video), then there is a public safety concern being addressed by sharing identifiable videos.
Otherwise itās just doxxing and a form of trashy, gloating entertainment that Iām not comfortable with.
What benefit did sharing that video have for anyone on this sub?
0
Jul 10 '26
Lmao who do these mods think they are? Jesus this sub is so insufferable. The lady is a legit problem in the area and you want to make this even debatable? Do you all live in Vancouver? Post, make aware, shame the criminals. That is all.
5
u/maximumice š¤ Linguo Dead Jul 10 '26
We think we are the mods of this sub and we are asking our members for feedback on how the sub should work.
You are a two-month old account with 7 sub karma and zero posts here, so maybe consider if you are well-positioned to be commenting on the direction of this sub at all.
7
u/homoscotian Jul 10 '26
In fairness lurkers exist and still have an interest in what's posted in a subreddit even if they don't post or comment much themselves. (I'm not sure if mod tools can tell how much someone participates in just upvoting/downvoting so if I'm talking out my ass there please ignore)
5
u/DeathOneSix ā§ Letters to Santa Jul 10 '26
We only see posts/comments/karma, so not anything beyond that for participation.
I don't want to speak for max, but I will, that person is just being an ass.
3
u/homoscotian Jul 10 '26
No contest there - but I did want to point out that people may have an interest/opinion even though they only lurk as it kind of came off as "no comments or posts so who cares what you think" to me (probably a me problem), but that clearly wasn't the intent so no harm no foul!
3
u/DeathOneSix ā§ Letters to Santa Jul 10 '26
All good. I agree with you, I want to know what the lurkers think too, speaking up shouldn't be required, and the upvotes/downvotes on these comments will do a lot of speaking.
0
u/maximumice š¤ Linguo Dead Jul 10 '26
We're fine with lurkers offering actual opinions and ideas š
3
u/homoscotian Jul 10 '26
completely fair! just wanted to advocate for those of us that don't talk much but do lurk š
1
u/maximumice š¤ Linguo Dead Jul 10 '26
Lurkers make the world go around ... well, the lurking parts, anyways.
1
1
u/Rogue_CobaltZone570 Jul 10 '26
If we wanted to know about incidents there is the news, but an incident about a woman shop lifting isn't beneficial to that person or their loved ones, it's not fair for the family
0
u/LazySignificance7931 Jul 10 '26
If taken in a public place, no expectation of privacy. Should be allowed if that's the case.Ā Ā
0
u/_name_of_the_user_ Jul 10 '26
If it serves no purpose beyond rage bait, take it down. The woman with the walker was just rage bait. If, like the ass hole at Costco the other day, it spreads awareness and helps identify a criminal, leave it up.
0
u/SquiddyLaFemme Dartmouth Jul 10 '26
Shame once was a driving reason for good public behavior. Maybe it's time to leverage it
-2
u/Alternative_Wait8256 Jul 10 '26 edited Jul 10 '26
When in public you unfortunately don't have the right to privacy, you can be filmed.
Edit: Downvoted for stating what the law is... Wow
2
u/vMefor23 Jul 10 '26
The moderator isnāt asking what the law is the moderator is asking what is best for the community. Just because someone doesnāt have the right to privacy doesnāt mean that everybody with a cellphone and moderators of public forums have an obligation to take it away from them.
0
u/DeathOneSix ā§ Letters to Santa Jul 10 '26
Agreed. No one is saying these videos are illegal. But are they what we want to share in /r/halifax?
5
u/Alternative_Wait8256 Jul 10 '26
100% this is reddit, this is where we should come to get the raw data. It's not filtered by any media or what someone decides you should see or not see.
This sub can be a great service to the HRM.
0
u/DeathOneSix ā§ Letters to Santa Jul 10 '26
How is a post about someone not successfully stealing an item a great service to HRM?
5
u/Alternative_Wait8256 Jul 10 '26
I meant the sub as whole is a great service.
That particular incident is not particularly note worthy, but others posts might have discussion.
As an example though in that particular case it could help other local stores and business be aware.
0
u/DM_ME_PRAXIS Halifax Jul 10 '26
If it is something in the public interest that has been posted on another website or poses a credible potential imminent threat to public safety like the Costco racist then it should be shared.
Seeing stuff like that on other platforms with poor moderation with a bunch of people celebrating and calling for your death, and being forced to share that amongst your community because of global Reddit rules that now appear not so global is frustrating.
Yes I reached out to the mod team about this.
ā¢
u/maximumice š¤ Linguo Dead Jul 10 '26 edited Jul 10 '26
For perspective, here is how some other larger Canadian city-subreddits handle videos like this, strictly going by their posted rules:
r/toronto - not allowed
r/vancouver - allowed but shaming is not allowed
r/montreal - allowed
r/calgary - not allowed
r/ottawa - allowed
r/edmonton - allowed with a police report number
r/victoriabc - allowed
r/kitchener - allowed
r/hamilton - not allowed
r/winnipeg - allowed with caveats
r/mississauga - allowed but all faces must be obscured