36
37

Meta PostLet's discuss some changes here at SRC. (self.subredditcancer)

28DansLaterFaction Chief が 投稿

What is cancer:

  • Modding ideologically in subs with no ideology.
  • Modding based on personal bias.
  • Modding based on personal vendettas.
  • Modding without transparency.
  • Modding a lot of subs in order to change Reddit's culture into something more palatable to you, and people like you.
  • Taking over established subs in order to push an ideology, personal bias, or further a vendetta.
  • Breaking a sub's rules, getting banned, being a dick to the mods, then crying "cancer!"
  • Banning someone in every sub you mod for a rule infraction that took place in a single sub.

What isn't cancer:

  • Getting banned for breaking a sub's rules.
  • Modding a lot of subs. Unless the mod is using their position to affect change sitewide, the number of subs modded is of no consequence.
  • A mod removing current reposts and off-topic submissions, or removing content to enforce a sub's theme. Don't go to /r/aww and expect to be allowed to post something better suited for /r/wtf.

What we want:

  • Submissions that adhere to these guidelines.

What we don't want:

  • Off-topic submissions. If your submission falls into the category of "not cancer," it doesn't belong here. We will enforce our theme, and we will always do so transparently.

  • We don't want our subscribers, current or future, being dicks in other subs, to other users, admins, or mods, and then expecting the community here as a whole to support them. We will not become hired-guns. We are not your personal army. Any attempts to change this mindset will result in a ban.

  • If you are banned for breaking a sub's rules, don't bring your sob story here.

  • Don't shitpost. Shitposts will be removed. Circlejerk lingo is considered shitposting.

  • Unless you can provide evidence of bias, a vendetta against you, or a mod acting ideologically, we don't want to hear about your ban from another sub. Shit's boring. Follow the rules of all the subs you participate in.

Bans:

  • It's a new day at SRC. We're going to make a fresh start. The ban list has been emptied. We will not hesitate to populate it with bans, though. Follow our rules and you have nothing to worry about.

Free speech:

  • Say what you want. Use any language you want. Don't think that having the freedom to speak your mind means that you can go off-topic. We will enforce our theme here.
全 45 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]b0dhi 13ポイント14ポイント  (24子コメント)

Agreed, except this:

Modding a lot of subs.

No matter what a person's intentions, a person that has that much power is simply too much of a danger, and not a hypothetical one. There's no legit reason for someone to do it anyway, since they can't mod that many subs effectively (as a volunteer). It's a tumour - the only question is whether it has yet metastasised.

[–]28DansLaterFaction Chief[S] 5ポイント6ポイント  (16子コメント)

I disagree.

I'll use /u/T_Dumbsford as an example. Dude mods a metric shit-ton of subs, yet he doesn't act in cancerous ways. No ideological bans, no vendettas.

[–]b0dhi 7ポイント8ポイント  (13子コメント)

Yeah, but what if they started to? It's like saying "yeah these 10 people have a button which sets off a random nuke somewhere in the world, but only 5 of them have pressed it so far!".

[–]Nechaev 2ポイント3ポイント  (6子コメント)

It's generally not a good thing to have too much power in too few hands, but it's how that power is applied that concerns us mainly. I'd probably put some limit on things like that (if it was up to me too), but when I see somebody using restraint with their power it hardly seem as toxic as some of the other stuff we're complaining about.

Some mods respect their responsibity to the community and don't drag their agendas with them into different subs. A lot of modding is simple and relatively dull as long as you're not trying to influence people's opinions with your position.

Now, squatting on subs to prevent them from being used by the community that wants them (/r/gamergate for example) is very shitty though.

[–]b0dhi 2ポイント3ポイント  (5子コメント)

I agree. Basically the only reason I'm saying this is that I don't want excluded in the future discussion about, e.g., the overall cancerous effect of powermods. To me, this rule could be used to exclude us from being able to post about that.

For example, what if someone wanted to map all the powermods's relationships on reddit? They would need to include the non-abusive ones, but their post could be removed on that basis if this rule is followed strictly. I know the current mods would probably not do that, but why have a rule that can be abused in the future? Just let the voting handle those rare cases where people are complaining about non-abusive admins.

[–]28DansLaterFaction Chief[S] 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

We don't want to alienate good mods and admins. The good should be praised, not vilified.

If the target isn't cancer, it shouldn't be disparaged here. We should support those who are good. Good admins and mods do exist, and they can be useful allies.

[–]IAMPOUNDCAKE 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

That isn't the point. While every system can be played, there are still general safeguards you should put into place to help prevent overall problems. Just as a group based government is more stable over time than a benevolent dictatorship, its a bad idea for anyone to wield so much power whether they are a 'good guy' or not. If a 'good' guy gets to take advantage then you can't condemn a 'bad' one without being a hypocrite. Hell, its why the US built the separation of powers into the constitution. Its the only real reason why the Senate and Congress don't get folded into each other as the old divide no longer holds any meaning.

[–]Nechaev 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

I certainly wouldn't exclude a post on that basis as long people aren't just accusing somebody of being a bad mod on the basis of a modmail they happen to share with some abusive mod.

What if you were able to join the mods on a sub that had been up to some doubtful conduct? Should you refuse for fear of being tainted, or perhaps join and try to change things and even if you couldn't get them to change their ways it might serve justice to at least keep an eye on them.

I might leave in disgust after a while, but I imagine I'd try at least.

My impression is that these people that push their ideologies in places where they don't belong usually aren't consciously motivated by malice. They mean well (in their own minds) but think that they know better than their subscribers.

[–]b0dhi 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

I certainly wouldn't exclude a post on that basis as long people aren't just accusing somebody of being a bad mod on the basis of a modmail they happen to share with some abusive mod.

I believe you, but mods come and mods go. Who knows what the situation will be 6 months or a year from now.

What if you were able to join the mods on a sub that had been up to some doubtful conduct? Should you refuse for fear of being tainted, or perhaps join and try to change things and even if you couldn't get them to change their ways it might serve justice to at least keep an eye on them.

I might leave in disgust after a while, but I imagine I'd try at least.

My impression is that these people that push their ideologies in places where they don't belong usually aren't consciously motivated by malice. They mean well (in their own minds) but think that they know better than their subscribers.

You're absolutely right, but that's exactly the same thing they're doing. And even if we say we're morally justified and we succeeded in pushing them out - power has a corrupting effect. I think the better solution isn't fighting fire with fire but rather putting out the fire altogether. If nobody can accumulate that much power, then the problem is avoided altogether.

[–]Nechaev 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

I believe you, but mods come and mods go. Who knows what the situation will be 6 months or a year from now.

That's all very true. For now we're just trying to get this sub back to the reasons we created it for. It got overrun with trolls and shitposts and whilst we might have got some attention most of it wasn't positive. We have serious concerns about how reddit is run and the sub wasn't doing them justice or making anybody better able to understand the points we were trying to make.. We'd like to get things back on track.

You're absolutely right, but that's exactly the same thing they're doing.

For me it's about running subs according to their stated purpose. If you have a sub like /r/videos and a mod removes content solely because it offends their political sensibilities I think they're a bad moderator. They're perfectly within their rights to set up a sub for "politically correct" videos and that would be the way to go about it. At one point SRS set up their own version on /r/Aww (because they were bothered by comments in the main sub). While I'm no friend to SRS I can at least respect them for something like that. Nowdays they (and like-minded individuals) seem more interested in bending the default subs (which are purportedly neutral) to suit their agenda and values.

My interest is in keeping political bias to a minimum. It's the same objection I'd have to a government competely controlling the media and removing anything which made them look bad. We all have our biases and opinions and that's fine by me, but I'd like people to moderate without betraying their biases. My biases and values are there in my comments, but I'd like ideally to moderate in such a way that those biases aren't evident from what I remove and approve ... and I'd like others to do the same.

We have plenty of partisan political subs and it's only natural for them to moderate according to their respective beliefs and ideologies. I might not agree with all of them, but that's not "cancer" for lack of a better term.

If nobody can accumulate that much power, then the problem is avoided altogether.

I get your point and it's certainly valid. The admins actually made a rule restricting the number of default subs a person can be a moderator of. That was a start, but more could be done. I seriously doubt any of the mods here would object to you arguing that in principle there should be a limit on how subs one should be allowed to moderated. Our point was only that we have discovered the occasional exceptions which make certain types of generalizations about all moderators with >n subreddits somewhat inaccurate and unfair.

[–]anon445 0ポイント1ポイント  (5子コメント)

What if a mod of one sub banned everybody that's male? It's not cancer until it's cancer.

[–]b0dhi 2ポイント3ポイント  (4子コメント)

At no point did I suggest that only mods who mod a large number of subs can be cancer.

[–]anon445 -1ポイント0ポイント  (3子コメント)

You missed my point. I'm saying any mod of a large sub has potential to do cancerous harm, but that potential doesn't justify calling them cancer.

[–]b0dhi 2ポイント3ポイント  (2子コメント)

The mere fact that they are modding so many subs is inherently cancerous. Nothing good comes from one person modding that many subs. Every single possible effect it has is detrimental. Even if they aren't actively abusing their power they are still poorly moderating.

[–]ArguablyTasty 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

Even if they aren't actively abusing their power they are still poorly moderating.

So if someone mods a lot of subs, does a good job, and cares about their community, they're still cancerous because they have too much power, and don't do a good job? I think you should take a good long hard look at your reasoning

[–]b0dhi 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

I don't think such a thing is possible. Nobody cares about that many different topics that much, and even in the extremely unlikely scenario they did, there's no way someone can do a good job moderating so many subs in their spare time. The example powermod upstream is modding 750 subs! Also, even if they have good intentions and somehow managed to put that superhuman effort in, they will still be behaving in a biased way because they're human. They'll be doing what they think is right but still would be exercising excessive influence simply because they are one person with power over 750 subreddits.

[–]billtheangrybeaver 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

It's better to say not cancer in of itself, but can be a symptom.

[–]kxxzy 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Or yourself as an example.

[–]87612446F7 4ポイント5ポイント  (2子コメント)

I also disagree with this being non-cancerous. No one can mod more than a few subs and not be a piece of shit.

[–]ArguablyTasty 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

Unless they became mods of several subs by showing dedication and doing a good job, which is why modding multiple subs isn't inherently cancerous

[–]kxxzy 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

At what point can you still have dedication to moderating a subreddit, when you have so many other subreddit's you need to be be moderating?

Say you have 3 hours on Reddit a day, with 3 subs to mod. That's an hour each. Then 6 subs, half an hour each. 12 subs, fifteen minutes each. 24 subs, seven and a half minutes. 48 subs, just over three minutes each. 100 subs, a minute and a half of moderating for each subreddit.

The mod who posted this thread, he moderates 117 subs.

[–]I_am_Rude -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

There's no legit reason for someone to do it anyway

Ya know, besides being good at being a moderator? I know way more shitty mods than good ones. I'm a shitty mod. If I had to pick between a guy who mods no subs and would absolutely suck at it or a guy who mods 40 subs and is awesome at what he does, I'll take the guy who's awesome at being a mod.

[–]darockzilla25 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

I agree with most of this, the sub was getting shitted up by all of the "I was banned from x" posts. Very rarely was it true cancer. If you want to vent about being banned from somewhere, head to /r/banned

[–]butthurtstalker 2ポイント3ポイント  (5子コメント)

How about an explanation for the mods you removed. For transparency of course

[–]darockzilla25 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

Now that you mention it, a better question would be why /u/meowing_cows was added in quietly during the darekening.

/u/meowing_cows is a mod on a few high profile subs, and he has been here in the past arguing in bad faith. Lately it seems I guess he has cleaned up his act; at least publicly. It is pretty strange that not only you, but one of the forefathers of not only this sub, but the original diagnosis into "meta cancer" , /u/jesus_laughed , has also been booted, and suspicious types like Cows are added. I agreed with /u/28DansLater about cleaning up the sub of shitposts and whiny " i got banned" cries but the moderation shift seems awfully iffy.

[–]GoatsacI've got a cock made out of platinum. 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

Pinged I was, and pinged here I am.

You didn't do shit, man. Like, at all. Not a fucking thing. If you want to pad your modlist, I can do something for you.

As it stands, as we are here. What the fuck did you ever do for /r/subredditcancer?

You know. I could ramble on and on and on. But that aint my thing.

You, as in you, wants to be a contributor. Well, contribute. Easy peasy, my brother.

[–]28DansLaterFaction Chief[S] 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

/u/Goatsac removed you. I'm pinging him so he can give you an answer.

[–]MissingIAMAgeddon 1ポイント2ポイント  (3子コメント)

What is the policy for defaults like worldnews? Other than harassment what justification is there for Americentric social policing?

[–]28DansLaterFaction Chief[S] 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

I don't follow that sub, so I'm not the best person to ask.

Is there a rule enforcing Americentralism?

[–]justcool393 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Posts that are about US internal news are removed, but it's said that US-only news will be removed on the sidebar.

[–]MissingIAMAgeddon 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Sorry, what I mean is that the policies surrounding harassment, racism, sexism... ect are all Americentric in the way that they are policed.

An (bad) example would be the use of the term "nigger". If I ever use it it is a term of endurance and friendship because where I'm from we appropriated it from US gangster culture (god, this is such a lame example) but when interpreted by US mods that are running an international site you can see how fucked that gets especially considering the current outrage culture that is so dominant.

EDIT: It works both ways, getting told my minority race group deserve being slaughtered because we are white seems totally cool.

I guess it's just one of those debatable things, not entirely a mod-cancer topic.

[–]Dwarf_Vader 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Disagreed with this:

Modding a lot of subs. Unless the mod is using their position to affect change sitewide, the number of subs modded is of no consequence.

Some people can mod many subs and still act in the interests of their community, but to say that this is a risky assumption is to say nothing at all.

By dispersing subreddits into the hands of many different people, the community can observe healthy growth and discussion. Consolidation of that power will only eventually lead to ambitious sad people getting into power, and bending the community to satisfy their egos.

Remember, mods aren't paid for their work, so there has to be some other form of compensations. To some, just observing their community prosper will be enough. Others will want to feel more and more power in their hands, or will have another ulterior motive, like pushing an agenda. Such people won't hesitate to use underhanded tactics, while people who act just in the interest of their community rarely fall to that level.

ninjaedit: And, as another user has pointed out, if a person has the power to blow up a nuke in a random city, but hasn't done so yet, doesn't mean they won't at some point. Is it fine to have so much power in one person's hands?

Also, it is of course hard to stop users from modding too many subs. They can create a new account or use a proxy. But that's not reason enough to sit down and accept their actions.

[–]pi_over_3 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

Are racist and sexist shit posters going to get banned now?

They've been my biggest issue with this sub, and frankly they take away lot of credibility.

[–]28DansLaterFaction Chief[S] 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Shitposting will earn you a ban regardless of who you are.

[–]Tohsakas_Anus 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

A mod removing current reposts and off-topic submissions, or removing content to enforce a sub's theme. Don't go to /r/aww and expect to be allowed to post something better suited for /r/wtf.

Well there goes BasediCloud's ability to use this sub as his soapbox whenever the KiA mods remove one of his posts lol. Guys gonna be salty as fuck when he realizes that.

[–]MaunaLoona 0ポイント1ポイント  (8子コメント)

Breaking a sub's rules, getting banned, being a dick to the mods, then crying "cancer!"

I think you meant to put that in the other category.

[–]28DansLaterFaction Chief[S] 7ポイント8ポイント  (7子コメント)

No, because that behavior is cancerous.

[–]MaunaLoona 1ポイント2ポイント  (6子コメント)

I see what you meant. Not cancer on the part of the mods who banned them though.

[–]28DansLaterFaction Chief[S] 8ポイント9ポイント  (5子コメント)

Right.

We refuse become a haven for people who break rules in other subs and then complain about their bans like assholes. People need to own their actions, and not use "cancer" as a crutch, or a "get out of jail free" card.

[–]MissingIAMAgeddon 2ポイント3ポイント  (2子コメント)

Beware the counter. I've seen users here cry SJW tears because people like to see offense where controversy is discussed or told they're the cancer when defending themselves.

[–]zahlman 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

So what you're saying is that good moderators have to actually think about what they're doing?

:o

[–]DiaboliAdvocatus 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Thank fuck. There have been far to many "hurr I broke the rules and got banned. CAKNER!" submissions recently.