Thank you very much for the background information. And also for the time you spend moderating—that is truly commendable and is indeed very much needed.
Perhaps I should have reached out to you directly, but I was so outraged that I didn’t, especially since this wasn’t the first post of mine you’d removed for the same reason.
Well, looking at all the downvotes here, it seems your approach to “showerthoughts” is being liked and even vigorously defended by many.
As I said, I see it differently and consider it very dangerous to define community rules so broadly that they simply leave the decision of what’s allowed and what isn’t exclusively up to the moderators. In your case, this seems to be done with caution and reasonable consideration. Nevertheless, I believe that rules must be clearly defined and transparent from the outset so that it’s clear what to expect. Likewise, to ensure that decisions are not made purely on a whim.
As I said, I consider the “no politics” rule unsuitable for this, since there’s simply no such thing as a topic that might not be political to someone.
But since many here seem to see it quite differently, I’m probably wrong. Still, I simply can’t accept that it’s a lottery whether my posts will be allowed or not in a general community that doesn’t have a fixed topic.
Therefore, I have to accept the rules and just post elsewhere, where there is no such rule. I think that’s better for everyone, since my posts at your community only seem to lead to conflicts, which is certainly not my intention at all.
If you’d like, I’ll delete this post here right away, but it seems to me that it might be a good way to gather some more opinions on the rule in question.
Please let me know if you see it differently—in that case, I’ll delete this post here immediately.
Thank you for the understanding and I do agree with your position as well. I did solicit some input from others that share similar views to you, but i have been too lazy to take action on it.
If you have ideas for how to make the rules more objective while still allowing a space for more light hearted content to flourish, I would love to hear your thoughts. Even if they arent fully formed. A community like c/cat_pictures has an easier time of it i imagine.
Hmm, well, the moderation workload does need to remain reasonably manageable for you guys.
I can’t really judge that, of course, but perhaps you could identify specific topics from the modlog that have repeatedly caused problems in the past. For example, posts about political parties (such as the two U.S. parties or the far-right AfD in Germany, etc.), political movements like MAGA, politicians like Trump and his allies, wars (such as the current U.S.-Iran conflict), or technologies like LLMs.
You could also try surveying the community itself to identify such “controversial topics,” perhaps in a pinned post, where you could set a minimum number of upvotes per suggestion for a suggestion to be included.
I think this would yield a number of concrete examples that illustrate what is meant by “no politics.” The more examples there are, the clearer it would probably be.
Thank you very much for the background information. And also for the time you spend moderating—that is truly commendable and is indeed very much needed.
Perhaps I should have reached out to you directly, but I was so outraged that I didn’t, especially since this wasn’t the first post of mine you’d removed for the same reason.
Well, looking at all the downvotes here, it seems your approach to “showerthoughts” is being liked and even vigorously defended by many.
As I said, I see it differently and consider it very dangerous to define community rules so broadly that they simply leave the decision of what’s allowed and what isn’t exclusively up to the moderators. In your case, this seems to be done with caution and reasonable consideration. Nevertheless, I believe that rules must be clearly defined and transparent from the outset so that it’s clear what to expect. Likewise, to ensure that decisions are not made purely on a whim.
As I said, I consider the “no politics” rule unsuitable for this, since there’s simply no such thing as a topic that might not be political to someone.
But since many here seem to see it quite differently, I’m probably wrong. Still, I simply can’t accept that it’s a lottery whether my posts will be allowed or not in a general community that doesn’t have a fixed topic.
Therefore, I have to accept the rules and just post elsewhere, where there is no such rule. I think that’s better for everyone, since my posts at your community only seem to lead to conflicts, which is certainly not my intention at all.
If you’d like, I’ll delete this post here right away, but it seems to me that it might be a good way to gather some more opinions on the rule in question.
Please let me know if you see it differently—in that case, I’ll delete this post here immediately.
Thank you for the understanding and I do agree with your position as well. I did solicit some input from others that share similar views to you, but i have been too lazy to take action on it.
If you have ideas for how to make the rules more objective while still allowing a space for more light hearted content to flourish, I would love to hear your thoughts. Even if they arent fully formed. A community like c/cat_pictures has an easier time of it i imagine.
Hmm, well, the moderation workload does need to remain reasonably manageable for you guys.
I can’t really judge that, of course, but perhaps you could identify specific topics from the modlog that have repeatedly caused problems in the past. For example, posts about political parties (such as the two U.S. parties or the far-right AfD in Germany, etc.), political movements like MAGA, politicians like Trump and his allies, wars (such as the current U.S.-Iran conflict), or technologies like LLMs.
You could also try surveying the community itself to identify such “controversial topics,” perhaps in a pinned post, where you could set a minimum number of upvotes per suggestion for a suggestion to be included.
I think this would yield a number of concrete examples that illustrate what is meant by “no politics.” The more examples there are, the clearer it would probably be.
A civilised discussion on the internet? Miss me with that nonsense - I’m here for mud slinging drama!
Yep, sorry. But hey, this thread definitely has its fair share of mudslinging. Hope you’re getting your money’s worth.