Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2026 Poal.co

658

This poll is now closed.

There should be generally very little moderation site-wide.
53 % (10 votes)
Heavy moderation is ok as long as it's sub-specific and there are very few site-wide 'community guidelines'
26 % (5 votes)
Something different (comment below)
21 % (4 votes)

(post is archived)

[–] • 7 pts

I don't care what people do in their own subs. If I don't like it I can block it and use something different.

[–] • 2 pts

Are you comfortable with what the effect would be if a single moderately popular subreddit migrated here?

Suddenly, plenty of content. Funny shit, art, news, history, discussions. But oh, your profiled says you participated in adswithwhitefamilies? BANHAMMER.

Granted, real Poal would still exist on the fringes.

[–] • 2 pts

While that would be sad I wouldn't begrudge people their own space to discuss whatever they want as long as they wouldn't come to one of my subs and try to shit up the place.

Real poal is forever

[–] • 1 pt

I wouldn't begrudge people their own space to discuss whatever they want as long as they wouldn't come to one of my subs and try to shit up the place.

Oh, but it's sooooo much easier for me to come to YOUR sub, downvote everything and shit all over the floor! Again, I agree with you. People are free to not like what you do and go make their own subs and fill it with what they approve of and want to see.

[–] • 1 pt

I don't care what people do in their own subs. If I don't like it I can block it and use something different.

I agree. Let's say you make a news sub and I hate it. All I have to do is put my big boy pants on, block your sub and make my own. Waste of fucking time for me to bitch and moan about what YOU are doing in YOUR sub.

[–] • 1 pt

As long as it isn't a core sub, like or for instance.

[–] • 2 pts

Should a mod be able to ban content they believe is objectionable (such as racism, off-topic, headline does not match title) or behavior they think is annoying (such as downvoting too much, criticizing the mod team)?

On the one hand, users get to choose which subs they use, so if moderation gets out of control they can just use an alternative sub, or create their own. On the other, we'd surely lose some of the magic that makes this site great if we got a big migration of snowflakes from some other site. One somewhat popular subreddit could overwhelm the entire site, making us into basically reddit (without the admin fuckery).

[–] • 1 pt

Moderation is fucking gay and I can prove it.

[–] • 1 pt

Yeah, but if it's YOUR SUB then shouldn't you be able to do what you want with it?

[–] • 1 pt

I definitely think if someone continually posts off-topic content to a sub deserves some kind of response from the sub moderator(s). Continuous downvotes, too. I would consider this a moderate position. If you keep posting vegan articles to a sports sub (and those posts don't mention sports very much or it seems like talk of sports was just sprinkled into a vegan text post) some action should be taken. What kind of action? I prefer to just PM people and usually that solves it. If the problem gets worse deleting posts and banning people could be appropriate, though it would need careful consideration.

Racism is a nebulous term so I'll assume you mean "death to x" type racism. If someone spams about that then it's just like being off-topic. Non-mainstream views on race and occasional expressions of distaste with a group of people is a matter of personal opinion. If you have a problem with that, PM or comment on a post. Headlines and titles not matching isn't an issue I've seen much of, but when it does come up it seems harmless. Someone could have come up with a better headline than the article or OP wishes to draw attention to a certain part of the article.Criticizing the mod team is fine as long as it isn't crude nonsense like a certain troll. Criticism is a part of accountability and keeping mods from being bullies.

[–] • 1 pt

Also all the good rules you mentioned have a grey area.

For example, maybe a news article about a muzzie shooting up gays doesn't belong in news because it's national news, doesn't belong in usnews because it's local news, doesn't belong in Orlando because it's national news.

[–] • 0 pt

a muzzie shooting up gays doesn't belong in news because it's national news

s/news is general news sub, isn't it? I think it could go there.

doesn't belong in usnews because it's local news

I always thought of s/usnews as a sub for news anywhere in the US.

doesn't belong in Orlando because it's national news.

It could if s/Orlando or s/Florida existed. It really depends on how strictly these subs are defined. I suppose as the site grows having descriptions about what does and doesn't fit will be more and more necessary to avoid such grayness.

[–] • 1 pt

Right, but who's job is it to make the definitions? Mods or admins? If it's not admins then you have to accept any level of redditry could exist (though it would have to compete against non-shit subs in the sub marketplace).

The example I gave is something similar to what happened on Reddit in the wake of Omar Mateen's rampage. Idk if the reasons for censorship are the same as what I mentioned, but basically every news sub SHUT. IT. DOWN. and anyone who wanted info had to go to /r/the_donald to talk about it (but presumably 90% just kept their heads in the sand).

[–] • 0 pt

Racism is a nebulous term so I'll assume you mean "death to x" type racism

This was a hypothetical and I actually intended it to mean reddit type racism -- any explanation for racial differences other than socioeconomic exploitation (by white people, obviously, you anti-Semite)

Generally I agree with your prescriptions for how a sub should be run, but my question is: if someone wants to run their sub with stricter controls, that neither you or I would agree with, should they be free to do so?

[–] • 0 pt

reddit type racism -- any explanation for racial differences other than socioeconomic exploitation (by white people, obviously, you anti-Semite)

Oh no! Not socioeconomic structural post-institutional quasi-systematic culturally colonized racism! If this nonsense comes in I suppose I might have to troll them in self-defense.

if someone wants to run their sub with stricter controls, that neither you or I would agree with, should they be free to do so?

Yes, as long as they make those controls perfectly clear. If someone wants to run an Internet fiefdom, they should stay on Reddit but wanting certain standards to be followed even if I personally disagree is okay as long as everyone knows what those standards are.

[–] • 0 pt

troll them in self-defense

literally violence

[–] • 1 pt

If you start your own sub and you're clear on how you're going to run it, then you should pretty much be able to do whatever you want. Generally I prefer a minimum of moderation, but if hypothetically, you were to start a sub requiring citations for every claim made, and requiring neutral language as apposed to inflammatory or misleading language; I wouldn't mind heavy moderation there if the rules weren't abused by the moderators. I don't have to like or agree with what you're doing on your own though.

In an established sub, you should be serving the community gathered there. I don't want to see any moderators taking over subs and throwing their weight around, trying to force their vision of how it should be on everyone else who contributed to it.

[–] [deleted] • 1 pt (edited )

The impossible question. I think there is no easy fix for now meaning it would have to be done on a case by case basis. Once you get to an easy fix / simple / routine solution and just go one way it screws a minority of users which can easily turn into a majority of users long term. Easy fixes and such have been known to ruin / screw entire websites in the past. It's so complicated alone to say the least as well when it comes to long term especially. An incredible solution now might screw it long term and such to as well.

Everyone could use their own custom flair for their own subs though.

"known to spam"

"suspicious user"

"trolls"

"Elite CounterTroll Operator" - I need this one for myself. Then label them "trolls" / "suspicious user" / "known to spam" for my own subs that I own.

"Tier -1 - CounterTroll Operator"

Mod team could then be "Elite CounterTroll Unit"? - long term?

"Chan Team 5 or 9" - maybe too far on this one. IDK for now though.

Flairs - only work in their subs they own (maybe mod) and such.

You gave me an incredible idea.

[–] • 1 pt

It’s a complicated issue, as far as I can tell there is no easy one size fits all answer, if people often want to see rules implemented to deal with a problem, then people abuse the rules to silence other people they don’t like. If you think of an easy solution though for sure let me know.