Analogies being what they are, let's make this one a little more precise. Reddit's not a nightclub, it's a nightclub factory, automating the process of creating a nightclub for anyone who wants to open one. Allowing for variation in how those clubs are run is a big part of the point--to explore the nightclub possibility space.
Unlike a real-world nightclub, individual subreddits are separated. In a real-world nightclub, you're automatically exposed to everyone else there, since you're sharing the same physical space. On reddit, you have to purposely enter a subbreddit (aside from the default ones, the curation of which is something I would agree is the responsibility of reddit-central).
> It's Reddit's choice not to exert control, and of course they're responsible for the consequences of their non-control.
They're responsible for the consequences of their non-control? In my book, control and responsibility go together.
To what extent (if any) do you believe that reddit users are responsible for their own posts?
Is the president of the USA responsible for your actions? Why or why not?
Without arguing with you, I do want to point out that "responsibility" is not a zero-sum game. If you make an ill-advised lane change in your car, but I am not constantly observing cars around me an strike you, we both have some responsibility, and the fact that you are 100% responsible for making safe lane changes doesn't mean that I'm not a little responsible, say 20%, for failing to predict your action. And the fact that I'm 20% responsible doesn't lower your responsibility to 80%.
So I'm not arguing with your basic feelings about personal responsibility, but at the same time, I'm not granting that if someone is responsible for their actions, it's a given that nobody else is responsible for the consequences.
When something bad happens, we can apportion responsibility for it. Sometimes one party is fully responsible for the bad thing. But other times, some other party is partly responsible, which must mean that the first party is not fully responsible.
If you're going to argue that party B is 20% responsible for a bad thing, then party A is at most 80% responsible. Party A can still be 100% wrong (they shouldn't have changed lane) but they're not 100% responsible.
We disagree on this fundamental idea. You and I talk, we agree to pick a random YC user, hunt him down, and pie him at a conference.
We are both 100% wrong and responsible. We each get the maximum sentence for assault.
We enlist the assistance of a friend to drive for us. we don't tell him what we're up to, but it's clear that the activity will be nefarious. he chooses not to call the cops, and he gets a lesser sentence.
He's less responsible, but his being less responsible doesn't reduce our responsibility, just as the two of us conspiring doesn't reduce responsibility to one half on account of the fact that either one of us could have called it off and just eaten the pies for dessert.
That's the difference between criminal and civil liability.
For criminal liability, it is exactly how you describe. Each actor is individually responsible for their actions, the actions of others don't reduce this.
However, for civil liability, there's an apportionment of damages based on a share of responsibility. Say the random YC user sued you, the other poster, and your friend. First, the damages against him would be quantified. This is based on the impact to him, not any moral judgment on your actions. Then, a jury would decide how much of the blame each of you was responsible for, and your liability would be that percentage of the overall damages.
Civil liability works that way because there is fixed pool of "damages" to apportion, so they're working out out how to split the payment. "Responsibility" in a moral sense is like criminal liability, there is no fixed pool to apportion.
Unlike a real-world nightclub, individual subreddits are separated. In a real-world nightclub, you're automatically exposed to everyone else there, since you're sharing the same physical space. On reddit, you have to purposely enter a subbreddit (aside from the default ones, the curation of which is something I would agree is the responsibility of reddit-central).
> It's Reddit's choice not to exert control, and of course they're responsible for the consequences of their non-control.
They're responsible for the consequences of their non-control? In my book, control and responsibility go together.
To what extent (if any) do you believe that reddit users are responsible for their own posts?
Is the president of the USA responsible for your actions? Why or why not?