•
•

Rule input from our subscribers (self.uncensorednews)

RamblinRambo3 が 投稿 - stickied post

As you already know our rules for this sub are as follows:

  • No advertising: Don't promote your subreddit, site, youtube channel etc. without prior approval.

  • English only (or English translation): English only; if your content isn't in English, provide a translation in the comments.

  • News only: Submissions must be news.

  • No trolling, gore, porn, scat etc.: Don't post shocking content just to troll. Gore that is news content (e.g. photos of shooting victims) is ok but mark it NSFL.

  • Reddit sitewide rules: Goes without saying, but reddit's sitewide rules apply here too: https://www.reddit.com/rules/

  • News verified as fake will be marked with a flair

There have been some valid concerns raised about the lack of "specificity" in the rules. Such as: News only: Submissions must be news.

This rule was suggested by one subscriber to be written so that only links referring to news no older than 14 days should be allowed.

So here's your opportunity to give your opinion on the rules and we'll take all of them into consideration when clarifying these.

NOTE: We will not consider any suggestions of rules that would limit or undermine free speech.

全 51 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

[–]Floormaster84 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

no opinion, just wanted to say thanks for having common sense and not allowing outside influence, dictate how this sub will be ran.

[–]Miles_Prowess 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

Ah, I browsed politics and news a lot, never really saw old news articles getting upvoted. Someone would point out it was old, and downvote oblivion. Pretty rare thing, too.

I'd say just do the flair thing you do with fake ones.

[–]dirkbungler 3ポイント4ポイント  (11子コメント)

Is this strictly an alternative to /r/news or can we submit news from outside of the US? /r/worldnews is just as bad or worse with the censorship (for example the Cologne sex attacks), so I'm hoping this place can be an alternative to both.

[–]RamblinRambo3[S,M] 10ポイント11ポイント  (10子コメント)

The rules say news. We don't care what country they're concerned with.

[–]IanPPK 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

Can we have a region and/or topic flair system ([US], [Europe], [ISIS], [Election], etc) such that people can self-curate the news specificity to their liking?

[–]RamblinRambo3[S] 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Nice idea. I think we could figure out some filter thingy. What do you thing /u/g_petronius is this doable?

[–]dirkbungler 1ポイント2ポイント  (7子コメント)

Awesome. Politics ok to post too? The default sub is pretty blatantly biased as well.

[–]RamblinRambo3[S] 2ポイント3ポイント  (5子コメント)

Politics ok to post too?

If it's from a news source yes.

[–]dirkbungler 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Thanks. Keep up the good work. This is what reddit should be. What it uses to be and what made it a good website to begin with.

[–]Santeriabro 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

You're a sexy man. 😘

[–]Wordshark 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

While I think this is the right call, what happens if this place gets overrun by US presidential election stuff? Just "so be it?"

[–]RamblinRambo3[S] 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

Just "so be it?"

Yup.

[–]Wordshark 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Cool. Probably the best approach.

[–]Miles_Prowess 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Political news counts as news, I'd hope.

[–]SpeakLikeAChild04 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

  • Allow opinion pieces but be sure to flair them appropriately.

  • Allow non-mainstream sources from left and right wing sites as long as the stories can be verified through other legitimate links. For example, if someone wants to submit something from DailyKos or Breitbart that would be fine as long as the story they're submitting can be found from other news sites so that we know it is legitimate.

  • Encourage posters to post links from verifiable and "respected" media outlets or websites. I like giving newer and smaller sites traffic and attention when they do a good job but I still prefer getting news from legitimate sources that are not sketchy and that most will agree are respectable and accurate with their reporting.

  • Editorializing titles should not be encouraged though you shouldn't ban the practice outright. Most people will not editorialize or alter titles and will submit whatever title is given to them through their link. However, others realize that the title of a link or story does not always accurately portray the meaning or deeper narrative behind a news story and these people might editorialize. I would see how things play with editorializing and if it becomes a problem then look into it.

[–]voidsoul22 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Allow non-mainstream sources from left and right wing sites as long as the stories can be verified through other legitimate links. For example, if someone wants to submit something from DailyKos or Breitbart that would be fine as long as the story they're submitting can be found from other news sites so that we know it is legitimate.

The problem with this is that news stations frequently opt not to publish stories at all, frequently due to the bias of editors. The counter to speech is more speech - if someone posts drivel from Breitbart or DailyKOS, then let users:

  1. Downvote it
  2. Post rebuttals (which if well done will be upvoted)

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

What happens if there are duplicate stories intentional or unintentional.

[–]RamblinRambo3[S] 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

The way we did it in /r/european was that we'd delete the duplicate and let OP know. Could be an option here as well. It is however extremely rare that two identical submissions would reach the front.

[–]Floorspud 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I think if it links to the exact same website it should be removed. If there are other sources it should be allowed to post. This will only "spam" the front page when big events like the Orlando shootings and then it's not a bad idea to have more sources for info.

[–]Miles_Prowess 1ポイント2ポイント  (3子コメント)

Self-posts are allowed though right? So many subreddits on this website are censored, I think you might be getting a lot of broad support. For example, askmen, askwomen, asklesbians whatever, I asked gays for their opinion on the Orlando tragedy on all those subs and it got removed for various reasons.

I think general political/news discussion should be allowed in self-posts, and self-posts are also instrumental in pointing out flaws in moderation, or censorship on other subs, or other things that you can't find an article reporting on but are doubtlessly important.

[–]RamblinRambo3[S] 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

Self-posts are allowed though right?

Yes. As long as it's news.

[–]2_Poops_A_Day 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

My two cents...If self-posts are allowed the quality of the content is going to plummet quickly and this sub will become a battle of who can scream the loudest. I don't understand why the discussion cannot take place inside the comments of the post. Do you allow all self-posts or do you only allow "quality" posts? How is the criteria for what constitutes a quality post defined? If you remove a self-post for a lack of quality is it then censorship?

Again this is only my opinion, but I am not going to trudge through a mountain of self-posts to find actual news content and I suspect I am not alone. Maybe I misunderstood what this sub was aspiring to be when I subscribed. Unbiased uncensored news is news presented in a manner that allows the reader to make a decision on their own. Self-posts seem to not support that as you are inherently injecting bias.

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

Agreed. I'm not interested in editorials as there is every sub under the sun available for just that.

I don't think sharing "the news" needs to be that hard. Keep it simple. OP can post in the comments just like the rest of the community and their opinion can rise or fall on merit. That way maybe more people will actually read the submissions before commenting on them.

[–]WilliamNyeTho 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

MODS = GODS

[–]Demacio 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

Are opinion pieces on recent events allowed (i.e. from the opinion sections of the New York Times, Al Jazeera, etc)? Sometimes such pieces can share or deepen insight in political issues or events. I always found it sad that those were forbidden on r/news. If you consider it, I would recommend a longer time-frame for them to be posted (for example not older than 30 days), or none at all.

[–]RamblinRambo3[S] 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'd consider them news yes.

[–]TheGreatRoh 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

If this a full replacement for /r/news , I'm in. And thank you for doing this.

[–]Chev__Chelios 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

Do we need additional clarification on user behavior such as "don't be a dick?"

I think that might cover it...It's not about being a safe space, but more about not being a dick.

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

No input other than to say keep it up.

[–]kb3pxr 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

Additional Suggestion for non-English sources would be allowing the use of the text "(non-english, Translation Required)" or variants thereof (key words being "translation required") as pasting translations in the comments could result in other issues (copyright claims against reddit and therefore censorship on those grounds) and simply preventing a Big ass comment.

[–]RamblinRambo3[S] 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

for non-English sources would be allowing the use of the text "

I don't know if I'm misunderstanding you or not but we already allow non english content as long as a translation is provided.

[–]TheChance 0ポイント1ポイント  (6子コメント)

NOTE: We will not consider any suggestions of rules that would limit or undermine free speech.

You guys do you, but I feel very strongly that tolerating hate speech dilutes intelligent debate. It isn't really about being "nice", to me, so much as it is about lending the false impression that opposing viewpoints necessarily have equal merit.

In journalism, the problem arises, for instance, when a talk show brings aboard one guest to represent "fringe theory" and one guest to represent "the scientific consensus."

On social media, the popularity contest is the problem. A really low-effort comment, consisting of nothing but bigotry, really doesn't stand to contribute anything. At best, it's an outlet by which bigoted people can reinforce each other, and hope to proselytize.

To allow all such speech, purely on principle, seems to me like it could only have two effects:

  • To create a magnet for people who really, really wish they could spout this stuff at their office job
  • To create a magnet for "topical" brigades

...all of which ends up having a chilling effect on good conversation, as the whole thing devolves into a forum for the repressed, angry minority.

So as much as I respect your position, I'm gonna keep walking. I figured the least I could do would be to articulate why.

[–]RamblinRambo3[S] 2ポイント3ポイント  (5子コメント)

that tolerating hate speech dilutes intelligent debate.

No one has yet to define hate speech. It's just a loose concept that is always used to censor opinions. Do you consider it hate speech when someone points out that the majority of the US prison population is black? Do you consider it hate speech when someone states that the average IQ among blacks is well below that of whites? Both are facts yet censored almost everywhere on reddit.

In journalism

If there is one profession that should be very quiet when it comes to what should and shouldn't be allowed it's journalists. They've ruined their own reputation by pushing an agenda rather than conveying the news.

[–]TheChance 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

Do you consider it hate speech when someone points out that the majority of the US prison population is black? Do you consider it hate speech when someone states that the average IQ among blacks is well below that of whites?

No. I consider it hate speech when those facts are leveraged to make more damning sociological implications. We could talk for hours about why both of those things are true.

And if you're a genuinely interested, open-minded adult who is disinclined to write off a whole segment of humanity because of their skin tone, then I don't see anything hateful in having that conversation. This country is broken in many ways.

My point is, you don't have to tolerate the Stormfrontesque side of it, the people who don't care that correlation isn't causation.

In short, there is a chunk of the populace who can't get their head around the fact that we aren't all bigots. They assume that everybody feels "that way" about anyone who's different, but most people are being suppressed or repressed by PC culture. Those are the people you censor. They only drag the conversation down.

[–]RamblinRambo3[S] 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Well what I can promise you is that we will not remove any comments just because they're bigoted etc.

[–]Floorspud 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

It's like if there is a debate on CNN about climate change or evolution and they give equal time to 2 people of opposing views. The fact is their viewpoints are not equal. Like imagine if they had somebody on talking about the horrors of pedophilia in the Catholic Church and then they say "well to be fair lets listen to this guy who is in favor of raping children".

[–]D1G17AL 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

The only thing I would really say on this. Most of the time I have understood hate speech to be equitable to speech that isn't covered under the first amendment. The type of things that would lead to the incitement of violence and other non-1st amendment types of speech.

Just my two cents.

[–]Floorspud 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Do you consider it hate speech when someone points out that the majority of the US prison population is black? Do you consider it hate speech when someone states that the average IQ among blacks is well below that of whites?

Debatable as to the reasons why this is the case. Saying it's due to their race could be hate speech, at least very narrow minded and not taking into account the way they are treated by society historically.

[–]snorkleboy 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I really like the idea of minimal moderation. The one concern I have with the 'let the community moderate itself' approach is that it makes it easy to brigade the sub.

I have no solutions, but I was wondering if you guys have any thoughts on this.

[–]Floorspud 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

News verified as fake will be marked with a flair

This is a good rule. Also since you don't have rules about keeping the same title from the linked article it would be nice to flair obvious misleading titles.

[–]baconborn 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I actually do like the 14-day rule. I think this should only apply to post submissions and not comments though, as older news pieces can become relevant in future topic discussions.

I think there should be a rule against click-bait titles too.

[–]arrow74 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I personally agree with the 14 day limit myself.

Also I believe we should make a rule to keep the original titles of the article. This is to avoid click bait, spam, and grandstanding (save opinion for the comments).

[–]menmoth50 0ポイント1ポイント  (5子コメント)

Should there be a list of unsupported news sites? I only mean known spam sites and the like.

[–]RamblinRambo3[S] 6ポイント7ポイント  (1子コメント)

The community is capable to moderate itself when it comes to this. Shit sources will be downvoted. No need for us to do anything about it.

[–]menmoth50 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

That's probably for the best, I can see how such a list could be abused to adhere to a certain narrative. Thanks so much for your prompt reply!

[–]duckvimes_ -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

That'd make it a lot harder for them to push their far-right agenda.

[–]D1G17AL -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

I think this is a good idea.

[–]xfLyFPS 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

We don't need to intervene here, the free market will fix it!

[–]salartarium -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

I think any American language news should be allowed, whether it's English, Navajo or Jive