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.
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.
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.
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).
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?
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.
troll them in self-defense
literally violence
(post is archived)