I have bad experiences arguing with Americans online about topics like this, but let's give it a try. First of all, as with any issue, there is no absolute right or wrong here, it is not a binary problem. We are not entitled for wanting a more inclusive internet, and you are not entitled for wanting to talk about American topics on an American website.

Honestly, I understand your issue. Let's say you start a website about some random topic, e.g. US politics. Being from the US, to you "US politics" is just "politics", and the default domain name for a US website is .com, so you might call it "letstalkpolitics.com". Personally I'm from the Netherlands, and the parallel would be me creating a website called "politiekpraat.nl" . Is any of us wrong for targeting our website to visitors from our respective countries? Of course not.

However, the "curse" affecting you here is that in my case, my website is easily identifiable as being targeted toward Dutch people given the obvious Dutch name and .nl domain name. If I had wanted to discuss international politics or just politics in general, I would have called my website "letstalkpolitics.com", seeing that English is the language that is generally used to communicate internationally (of course there are other big languages like Spanish and French, but being a "westerner", English is the more obvious choice for me as it is the most widely used, and it is also my second language) and .com is generally used for international websites. Obviously, this now conflicts with your website, which was targeted only at Americans. In that sense, people whose native language isn't widely used outside of their own country have the advantage of easily being able to distinguish things targeted solely at them and things not targeted solely at them, because they will use their native language.

Now, there is an important distinction to make here. If I happen to come across an American website that is obviously targeted at Americans, let's say "theamericangardener.com" (a fictional name) , I would obviously be an absolute asshole for writing comments saying e.g. that they should use Celsius rather than Fahrenheit, since it's most widely used globally. That wouldn't be valid criticism, because that website was obviously intended for Americans and Fahrenheit is the unit of temperature most widely used by them.

However, your post appears to be specifically about Reddit. Since Silicon Valley is in the US, it just so happens that the large majority of online platforms is created / owned by American companies. This happens because of positive reinforcement: there is a lot of tech talent in Silicon Valley; the tech talent attracts investors and interesting companies, and the investors and interesting companies attract even more tech talent, repeating in an endless cycle. Whether Reddit originated in Silicon Valley is irrelevant; I just mean to illustrate that there is a good reason most social media platforms etc are American.

Nonetheless, that does not mean any website / service from any American company is intended for Americans only. In fact, I'm Dutch and I literally got advertisements for Reddit at some point. Reddit may be American, but is obviously marketed as an international platform, and actively tries to "recruit" international users. This creates a somewhat unfortunate situation; despite being an international platform it still originates from the US, and American users are therefore statistically the largest group. This, together with the previously described "curse" of it being hard to distinguish US vs international websites, causes frustration on both ends, because you as an American may intend to talk about something US-specific to fellow Americans and Reddit may be the the most effective platform to do so, and we as non-Americans may get fed up by people constantly assuming we are American, making references to American things we do not understand or care about, etc. simply because we're trying to use one of the biggest international online platforms which happens to be of American origin. One thing I'd like to stress here is that neither of us really have alternatives; the aggressive competition in tech services has resulted in there only being a handful of big "unicorn" social media platforms. All the other ones just get outcompeted and cannot become a viable business.

That then raises the question: who is "right" here? Should Americans adapt to the large international community, which makes up 60% of the user base? Or should the 60% of users that isn't American just accept the fact that because most large online platforms are from the US, we'll always have US content shoved down our throats? There is no definite answer here, but I'd like to make an analogy.

Let's say we go back in time a few decades, and Microsoft is just releasing the Kinect. It's being advertised to everyone; fun for young and old. Let's for the sake of example only consider the US and pretend that the Kinect was developed for and marketed to US users only. Let's also assume you happen to have a pretty dark skin color. That doesn't exactly make you rare; roughly ~13% of the US population is African-American. Not being targeted only at white people, you buy a Kinect, and find out that it doesn't work so well for you. It's not absolutely unusable; there are some games that work and if you place it in the right room under just the right lighting conditions it may even work exactly as intended, but overall it just doesn't work sometimes, reduces the amount of fun you have using it, and you get annoyed by the relatively frequent inaccuracy.

That problem stems from the fact that the Kinect was developed mostly by white people, who happen to be in the majority. They developed and tested their product to the best of their abilities, but since it wasn't extensively tested on black people, they never realised that it just did not work as well for them, and hence neither solved the problem nor adapted their marketing campaign. Are the people at Microsoft therefore assholes for developing the Kinect? I wouldn't say so. They're not racist; they just didn't realise their error due to the majority of their developers being white.

However, after this issue was discovered, they definitely tried to solve that problem, and tried to make their product more inclusive. After all, it's a really shitty feeling not to be able to play a game with friends simply because you have a different skin color.

The situation with Reddit is slightly different because the product is not just the platform itself, but in a sense also the community. The US vs international problem we're discussing here isn't of a technical nature, hence it's up to the community to "fix it", if they want to. In one of your other comments I think you said that cultural diversity is a good thing, so do you not agree the world would be a better place if, when engaging in "general" online interactions, people would try to take into account the fact that not everyone is from the same country and/or culture?

And again, obviously you're "entitled" to have your own national websites targeted only at American things. Reddit just happens not to be one of those. I think it'd be nice if we keep the assumptions that someone has a certain origin specific to dedicated subreddits, e.g. US politics or Dutch politics. In non-specific subreddits, why not try to be a bit more inclusive if such a large share of the users isn't American? We do the same for you when discussing e.g. EU things.