This post is locked. You won't be able to comment.

256
257

ModLet's talk about iEarlGrey's ban (self.WorldOfWarships)

audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP] が 投稿

I'm a little concerned that a community contributor has been quietly banned from the community without actually breaking a rule. It was stated here that iEarlGrey was banned for breaking the 9:1 rule, whereby you must post 9 "general" comments/posts for every 1 self-promotion you post.

The issue? Well, we don't actually appear to have this rule... There are three sources of rules I'm aware of for this subreddit

  • The rules page for the subreddit contains no mention of a 9:1 rule. In fact, it makes no mention of self-promotion whatsoever.
  • While the sidebar content makes no mention of a 9:1 rule, only that the user must have a combined 20 link and comment karma.
  • As far as I'm aware, the 9:1 rule is not in the content policy, which is the "Global" Reddit rules.

In fact, the only mention I can see of a 9:1 "rule" is not a rule at all, but merely noted in the good reddiquette guide as something which is sometimes enforced as a rule.

Feel free to post links to your own content (within reason). But if that's all you ever post, or it always seems to get voted down, take a good hard look in the mirror — you just might be a spammer. A widely used rule of thumb is the 9:1 ratio, i.e. only 1 out of every 10 of your submissions should be your own content.

But that isn't a rule, it's simply a guide on good behaviour you may wish to follow, and notes that many subs enforce such a rule. I'd argue that this is not even close to being an explicit rule. In fact, it even states on that page:

Reddiquette is an informal expression of the values of many redditors, as written by redditors themselves. Please abide by it the best you can.

Reddiquette is a guide to "how to behave well" but is absolutely not, in and of itself, a set of rules.

If we're going to enforce such a rule, I believe it needs to be explicitly included in the subreddit rules. I don't really care what the rules are (within reason) but they need to be clear, stated, and consistently enforced.

At this stage, it appears to me that iEarlGrey was banned for breaking a rule that doesn't actually exist. Am I missing something?

上位 200 件のコメント全て表示する 230
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]GimlzNA Moderator[M] [スコア非表示] stickied comment (44子コメント)

This is not the first time we have dealt with this issue, as IEarlGrey is a repeat offender, please see previous discussions.

https://www.reddit.com/r/WorldOfWarships/comments/453y6h/outraged_with_iearlgrays_treatment/?ref=search_posts

As this is spiraling out of hand, this thread is now locked.

  • As far as I'm aware, the 9:1 rule is not in the content policy, which is the "Global" Reddit rules.

So, look at this then. If you look at

https://www.reddit.com/help/contentpolicy

Look at the first list of things, and see where it says "Is spam"

Click that, you get this site.

https://reddit.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/204536499

Note the two first bullet points.

  • If your contribution to Reddit consists primarily of submitting links to a business that you run, own or otherwise benefit from, tread carefully.
  • Additionally, if you do not participate in other discussions or reply to comments and questions, you may be considered a spammer and banned from Reddit.

I rest our case.

[–]dumberanddumbestCarefreeTongue@NA | Ban all Weebs! 22 ポイント23 ポイント  (4子コメント)

If Earl put everything in his vids into writing, would he still be banned?

[–]GDFKTT[Alpha] 39 ポイント40 ポイント  (0子コメント)

And there is is folks - ding ding ding!

If you post everything you want to share as a wall of text, all is forgiven because you're "contributing to the community" but don't you dare share a link that's pictures or a video to enrich the community because that's "self promotion".

Paging u/iEarlGrey please start posting your content as ASCII art snapshots to avoid getting banned again. HEY IT'S ALL TEXT SO IT'S ALL GOOD!

What an absolutely pretentious load of bollocks. I can't tell you how many other reddit subs I have seen that are nothing but page upon page of picture and video content links to self-created content. Mods, at the very least if you're going to enforce that kind of crap here, put it in the official sub rules on the sidebar.

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

An interesting question

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

His videos are monetized (or have the potential to be). He has a financial incentive to get as many views as possible. Not the same with a text post on reddit. That said, think a warning more appropriate than a ban (if in fact he was banned without warning).

[–]Barbosa003 117 ポイント118 ポイント  (21子コメント)

There are a handful of established CCers that shouldn't have to worry about this rule/etiquette. Earl Grey is one of them. These handful of contributors have such content that makes/made them and their material quite valuable to everyone. Most of these guys have numerous videos on ship builds, captain points, etc. If a CC wannabe or a CC (described above) only makes or reverts to "Look what I did in Shinyhorse" type videos, then I can see some sort of discipline.

[–]Trump-For-LifeRanked: Wallet Size Matters! 30 ポイント31 ポイント  (4子コメント)

This. I know it's a fine line where you draw the line at those allowed to post their own stuff, but I think iEarlGrey is clearly within bounds. I'm not a moderator here, but I have been a Reddit moderator. We never issued a ban based on Reddiquette.

If all else fails, I think we should take the "Flamu" approach- when a video of his comes out, someone here posts it. We are all /u/iearlgrey in a sense then.

[–]Barbosa003 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (3子コメント)

That fine line...that is why I wrote "established" in my post. One may not agree with all the content an established CCer puts out, hell, one may not even like an established CCer, but the content is still valuable even if it doesn't work for some peoples play style. I think there should be exemptions for some of these CCers.

[–]Daddldiddl 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Established or not - even if only all 'established' contributors were to post their videos this subreddit would still be unreadable. Who's to decide who deserves an exception? Contributor or not the rule is simple and sensible: participate actively in the sub and you get to occasionally selfpromote. Dont participate (much), then you don't. Working around this by having other people post is just as spammy (even if the creator isn't involved).

[–]Trump-For-LifeRanked: Wallet Size Matters! 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Agreed. FWIW, I only moderated political subreddits. But, even in those, there were a group of users who everyone knew. These were the ones that, like it or not, they were the backbone of the community. I think iEarlGrey is one of them here without a doubt. In fact, if this many people are interested in his ban, then that's proof positive to me that he is one of those people.

[–]reivisionDD hunter 12 ポイント13 ポイント  (15子コメント)

The problem with this is that it's a gray line. Does someone need established "WG Community Contributor" status to be exempt? I can easily see some people seeing content as spammy whereas others may not.

But that's really a moot point and is a red herring here. The quality of iEarlGrey's content (or anyone else's) is not the question here, nor does it factor into the interpretation of the rules.

High quality content doesn't somehow make you exempt of the user rules and policies of a platform.

This is not a /r/WorldofWarships-level rule. It's a Reddit-wide thing. I've had to warn and/or ban accounts as a sub mod elsewhere.

the 9:1 rule is not in the content policy, which is the "Global" Reddit rules

It's not explicitly there, but if you go into the "spam" link under "Unwelcome Content", self-promotion is the first and foremost bucket, with a link to the Reddit-wide self-promotion guidelines that include the 9:1 guideline.

Regardless of how buried and less visible they may be, the Reddit rules and etiquette clearly show an intent to limit self-promotion.

No sub is supposed to be mainly an aggregated feed on the top content creators for a sub's topic. Yes, their content will naturally appear frequently and often if their content is a popular part of the sub's community, but the intent in the Reddit rules and etiquette is that each Redditor is part of the community and contributes to discussions in the sub at large, not just his/her own threads and linked content, especially if that content is monetized somehow.

Other content creators have been warned and have had posts removed in the past too (/u/aprilwhitemouse comes to mind, and I've posted two of /u/flamuchz's recent vids). From what I've seen, the mods here have been pretty reasonable and have given content creators who stray into "spammer" territory warnings before resorting to anything as extreme as a ban.

Again, this is nothing against iEarlGrey or his content; it's just the rules of Reddit as a whole.

Making the 9:1 guideline more visible is likely a good idea overall, so people don't unknowingly stray into the "spammer" territory.

TL:DR; The rules don't care how good your content is; by definition if you primarily post your own content and comment only in your own content link threads (or not at all), then by Reddit policies you're a spammer.

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 16 ポイント17 ポイント  (1子コメント)

with a link to the Reddit-wide self-promotion guidelines that include the 9:1 guideline.

Which is itself a guideline based on the Reddiquette informal guidelines. I still don't see how those things are enforceable rules.

To be clear: I have zero objection to this becoming a rule and being added to the sidebar, but it is not currently a rule and people shouldn't be banned for it.

[–]reivisionDD hunter 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

To be clear: I have zero objection to this becoming a rule and being added to the sidebar

I think this is exactly where this post and discussion will (and should) lead. It's the natural and most reasonable moderator reaction if they continue enforcing the 9:1 policy.

but it is currently not a rule

I think this is debatable. Reddit content policy says that:

Content is prohibited if it:

...Is spam

"Prohibited" is pretty explicit. I'd certainly call this "rule" language.

Self-promotion is included in "spam" (the first and foremost topic in the link).

Now whether there is some wiggle room there in interpretation of what constitutes rule-violating self-promotion (and thus spam) is really the issue here.

The "spam" page does say:

If you are posting your own content and other redditors appreciate and upvote your posts, you have nothing to worry about.

But it also says:

If your contribution to Reddit consists primarily of submitting links to a business that you run, own or otherwise benefit from, tread carefully.

I am not familiar with the YouTube monetization rules and who might or might not be making money from views on their content, but I could definitely see a posting history that is majority links to your own YouTube content to fall under the "spam" definition according to Reddit.

In general Reddit rules have to be quite vague by definition. What constitutes threatening, harassing, or bullying language is often a subjective line when you don't have a full legal case in play. Reddit guidelines have to be vague by necessity. And hence they are often posited more as "guidelines" than "rules," but recently Reddit has cracked down on its content policy rules and shut down many subreddits which were in that gray area or beyond in regards to these "guidelines."

If you read Reddit's policies as a whole regarding self-promotion, it's pretty clear that Reddit is intended to stay independent of content creators - Reddit is not meant to be an extension of their YouTube/Twitch/Twitter/Discord. There is naturally some overlap that occurs, but I think it gets to be a little much when a CC posts a link to every WoWs-related video they upload. Hence the idea of "community-sourcing" links, where some of more interest get posted, and others perhaps may not.

Whether there should be an exemption based on the quality of said content is I think a very, very dangerous path to tread and really is a separate matter that many are simply lumping in with the above (you aren't, but the upvote/downvote brigade isn't quite as discerning it seems).

Quality is very much subjective, despite what the "Reddit hivemind" may think about production value and contribution to community discussion.

For example, there are many CCs whose content I never watch, having found them of little value to me personally, and to me they might as well be spam when posted here. I'm sure there are many people who disagree with me.

And going by things like "established" is also subjective. These things come and go. When does one gain or lose "established" status? Where is the cutoff that makes you exempt?

This is likely why the mods are falling back on an easy-to-determine and objective measure of "spam" - self-content ratio.

Also there's the simple fact that they don't have the jurisdiction to override Reddit-wide policy.

For the record, I don't agree with how the mods responded in this thread; I think it was handled poorly and simply incited more pitchforking. And they are continuing to do so. The "us vs. them" defensive mentality is coming through strongly in their posts, and that's never a good for moderator-community relations.

Should have been just an upfront "here's the link to the Reddit policy we're enforcing, we're adding a rule and link on the sidebar to make sure people know what's going on and what to avoid in the future. If you want to discuss so-called exemptions to this rule, that's a separate issue to discuss, but meanwhile these are the rules."

[–]Barbosa003 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (12子コメント)

Oh, don't get me wrong. I'm not saying, let alone thinking you mods are unreasonable. But couldn't there be an exemption some time in the future for established CCers? I mean, if a CCer has 35 ship builds and 25 ship captains points builds and 40 tactics videos for 40 different ships, well, doesn't that mean something? Then again, I understand the Reddit wide rule. But it just doesn't fell or seem right to ban such an established CCer. Dontcha think?

[–]syandaTone. Now. -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (11子コメント)

But couldn't there be an exemption some time in the future for established CCers?

The problem is that the mods can't really make this call, given the reddit admins have this as a guideline.

We're not making a judgement on your quality, just your behavior on reddit. Your stuff's probably amazing and someone would be really interested in it but...

If you submit mostly your own links and your presence on reddit is mostly for your self-promotion of your brand, page, blog, app, or business, you are more likely to be a spammer than you think! Read the FAQ and make sure that you really understand that.

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (4子コメント)

I think this is interesting discussion, but regardless of whether the rule has an exception, I'd really like to bring the focus back onto the point that the rule doesn't actually exist

Once it does, then we should certainly have a discussion, as a community, about whether CCs get an exemption, and how that exemption is granted (personally, I don't see a need for it)

But I really, strongly feel that there is a need for the rule to exist, with or without exemptions for CCs

[–]syandaTone. Now. -4 ポイント-3 ポイント  (3子コメント)

I think this is interesting discussion, but regardless of whether the rule has an exception, I'd really like to bring the focus back onto the point that the rule doesn't actually exist

Once it does, then we should certainly have a discussion, as a community, about whether CCs get an exemption, and how that exemption is granted (personally, I don't see a need for it)

Respectfully, I disagree. The rule exists. It may be called a guideline, but the Reddit admins can and do issue sanctions based on their sitewide guidelines - which I know from personal experience, having seen content creators shadowbanned before, and being shadowbanned myself before.

The current Reddiquette guidelines function similar to a Terms of Use document, in which it outlines behaviour that ought to be followed, with sanctions listed for what happens when they aren't. By using the reddit platform, we implicitly and tacitly agree to follow the above guidelines. Where I think the subreddit CAN improve and make it more explicit is adding a blurb to the current ruleset stating that reddiquette has to be followed at all times. This transforms it from an implicit understanding to an explicit one.

Frankly, I don't think anyone contests that iEarlGrey makes quality content. Not even the moderators. Unfortunately, it's not their call to make - issuing a subreddit ban from a subreddit moderator as a tangible warning and get people to sit up and take notice of the issue is a lot easier than reversing a sitewide reddit sanction. From my personal experience with the moderation team, I understand that they're likely to have given verbal heads-up in the past before issuing the ban itself - the ban is not the first tool they utilize.

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (2子コメント)

I think you're basically defending bad moderating decisions here, based solely on the fact that bad moderating decisions are made sitewide.

If we can improve clarity in this sub, why don't we? All we need is a clear rule in the sidebar

[–]syandaTone. Now. 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

If we can improve clarity in this sub, why don't we? All we need is a clear rule in the sidebar

Which is something I've already said.

Where I think the subreddit CAN improve and make it more explicit is adding a blurb to the current ruleset stating that reddiquette has to be followed at all times. This transforms it from an implicit understanding to an explicit one.

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm in complete agreement with you, then :) that's all I'm really asking for here, personally

The rest of the thread is just for discussion of the rule

[–]Barbosa003 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Understood

[–]Trump-For-LifeRanked: Wallet Size Matters! -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (4子コメント)

Trust me, the Reddit Admins have way larger things to worry about than "What's Up with Warships".

[–]syandaTone. Now. -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (3子コメント)

I agree that they have way larger things to worry about - up until some asshat decides to spam report content creators and some zealous admin decides to stick to their site policy.

Which, unfortunately, has happened to some gaming subreddits I was a member of before - where salty users with a vendetta have successfully gotten quality content creators shadowbanned from reddit for violating the self-promotion guideline. My memory fails me, but I recall that at least one of them failed to have their shadowban reversed.

[–]Trump-For-LifeRanked: Wallet Size Matters! -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (2子コメント)

That they could do (But I doubt spam reporting would happen here anyways)

What I was referring to was the argument of "If we don't do this, they'll sanction the Subreddit". There are some subreddits that have done way worse than that IMO, and they're still fine. To be honest, we're so small that I doubt the Admins really care about this place.

The community cares for iEarlGrey though. I haven't seen a community show this much compassion towards a banned user ever. On any Subreddit.

[–]syandaTone. Now. 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

That they could do (But I doubt spam reporting would happen here anyways)

There was (and as far as I know, still is) a user with a massive vendetta against Wargaming content creators for posting on the "official" wargaming subreddits (i.e. /r/WorldofTanks, /r/WorldofWarplanes and /r/WorldofWarships) instead of posting on his own independent subreddit for video content. There was some drama on /r/WorldofTanks some time back because this user in particularly spam-reported all video content on /r/WorldofTanks for violations of self-promotion. As far as I know, when World of Warships was still in CBT, this exact same thing happened to this subreddit.

[–]TheFirstArkAngelAkizuki Destroyer of Worlds 16 ポイント17 ポイント  (1子コメント)

where have i seen this 9:1 before...

ah right, nozoupforyou also got one of his videos removed for that reason (something something self-promotion not allowed)

but banned is a little harsh, assuming there was no warning

iEarlgrey seems like the kind of guy that would figure something out after a warning (for example telling someone else to post his video, like nozoupforyou did)

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'd say that it was wrongly applied to NoZoup, too, then: there's no rule I see against self promotion in this sub

[–]Zulu_Zulu_ZuluPolish Navy 48 ポイント49 ポイント  (6子コメント)

I completely disagree with EarlGrey fairly frequently, but his videos are decently well produced, they're on message, and they spur discussion.

There should be exceptions for quality contributors, because at the end of the day discussion, not karma, is what matters.

[–]skoorvielSinking ships is my business, and the business is good! 16 ポイント17 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Well, since no actual rule was broken, the ban should not have happened in the first place.

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 14 ポイント15 ポイント  (2子コメント)

I agree... although I'd add that in this case, there's no rule for him to be excepted from

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

That's a good point too.

[–]Yasenpoi 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

I think the rules allow other people post his videos if they find them worth posting.

[–]syandaTone. Now. 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Pretty much. It's pretty clear (to me, at least) that the principle behind reddit policy is to prevent themselves from being utilized as an advertisement platform, while still being a platform for quality discussion. That's why there's a section devoted as to what constitutes spam (in the eyes of the reddit admins) that would probably conflict with what each of us personally define and spam.

[–]TheFaolchuFaolchu 17 ポイント18 ポイント  (0子コメント)

This reddit is for discussing the game and content about it. Community contributors are WGs endorsed content creators. But they can't link their own content here because apparently we don't want actual informed discussions.

I want to see community contibutors content here, I don't want to have to go hunting for it.

Also if you can ban someone as unobjectionable as iearlgrey you've either got iffy rules or you've taken fake internet power a bit too far. Hopefully its just iffy rules and you open this reddit up to be about informative content and not a series of posts of gifs of the game.

[–]MrFingersEUHistory Buff | Sailin' and failin' in the Warspite. 51 ポイント52 ポイント  (3子コメント)

Strange that of all people iEarl gets banned (even I expected to get banned before him for my constant shinkicking against WG-EU), his digests and careful enfilade of WG in "What's up with warships" is some of the highest quality WoWS-youtube content around (I rate it as high as the iChase Captain's Academy). And it's not that he just posts his links on a daily basis, he also participates in discussions (and in other threads), so...

Then again, WoWS-reddit mods have done some more questionable things in the past, like the initial silencing of the Santa Convoy EU debacle, which did need a personal intervention from an EU moderator to kept the thread going in the end...

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 14 ポイント15 ポイント  (2子コメント)

I couldn't agree more, and the initial EU Convoy thing was definitely forefront in my mind as I posted this, as another example of the rules being mishandled (it was my thread which was initially removed). But while in that case I can see that there was a "borderline" interpretation issue, in this one there is no rule to be interpreted

[–]MrFingersEUHistory Buff | Sailin' and failin' in the Warspite. 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Still, even with these "flaws", the WoWS-reddit is still a better place than the EU-forums, so...

[–]LamiaMiiaANTI RDF 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (0子コメント)

One of the most, if not the most informative & consistent series on the direction of the game and what is going on has been banned.

Wow.

[–]OriginUnknown82Royal Navy 14 ポイント15 ポイント  (0子コメント)

/r/worldofwarships has gone full [EU]

[–]Racound 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (7子コメント)

I know for a fact that the admins have banned people from reddit for self promotion in the past. To be fair, those people only submitted their own content, no comments nothing.

So is it fair to ban someone based on this? probably? I won't judge it but as far as I am aware iEarlGrey received a warning in the past, that is why he started to write more comments - mostly within is own submissions.

Sure, the mods could have warned him beforehand but at some point you just don't want to deal with the same thing over and over again.

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (6子コメント)

I've seen many bans from subs which do have this rule, but never from one where the rule isn't explicitly mentioned in the subreddit (or indirectly mentioned as a "This sub enforces rules from Reddiquette")

The fact for me is that the rule does not exist on this subreddit, only as part of an etiquette guide: etiquette is not law, I don't get arrested if I refrain from holding open a door for those behind me, or using the dessert spoon for my soup.

[–]Racound 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (1子コメント)

well, I had this before, the rule was not enforced by the subreddit, the person was directly reported to the admins and as a result got a full reddit ban - so it's not just "reddiquette" but actually something that should be kept in mind when posting your own content.

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Perhaps, but do we want our mods to drop to the level of "making it up as we go along" Reddit admins?

This can be solved easily by removing the ban and adding a rule. If IEG breaks the rule after that point, fine - but I disagree vehemently with people being banned for rules that are not stated.

[–]ShuggieHamsterWatching you from on high 15 ポイント16 ポイント  (1子コメント)

hadnt realized that ban was still in place. I had thought it a bit ludicrous at the time. IearlGrey is probably one of the least objectionable streamers around and doesnt abuse this site.

Am all for this rule (if indeed it truly exists) to be not apply to iEG.

[–]syandaTone. Now. 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Am all for this rule (if indeed it truly exists) to be not apply to iEG.

It's not our subreddit moderators' call to make.

We're not making a judgement on your quality, just your behavior on reddit. Your stuff's probably amazing and someone would be really interested in it but...

If you submit mostly your own links and your presence on reddit is mostly for your self-promotion of your brand, page, blog, app, or business, you are more likely to be a spammer than you think! Read the FAQ and make sure that you really understand that.

[–]skoorvielSinking ships is my business, and the business is good! 25 ポイント26 ポイント  (4子コメント)

Who's the ass-hat who issued the ban? Anyone know? iEarlGrey is a great CC'er, he should continue to be able to post his links here. I reviewed the rules carefully, nothing there about self-promotion. Hell, if you want to enforce that non-existent rule of 9:1 post ratio, I encourage content creators and community contributors to send me their links, I would be happy to post them up for you to circumvent this BS.

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I've no idea, and personally I don't care - I don't wish this to become a witch hunt, just a discussion of the current rules as they stand, and how this is handled going forward.

Personally I'd like to see iEarlGrey unbanned, since he hasn't broken any rules, and a clear, unambiguous set of rules and guidelines put in place for both official CCs and other content creators.

If that includes a 9:1 or 10:1 rule, great, if it includes exclusions for respected content creators, great, if it doesn't, also great.

But we badly need some clarification of this, because right now there are simply no rules regarding it, and people are being banned for a rule that doesn't exist.

[–]DangerousFatBattleship 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

My only question is why was this rule enforced? In what way has it made our community better or safer?

[–]Coldini 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Blatant self promotion should just be deleted (eg link to a video with no context or discussion) where they just getting views and not concerned with reddit itself other than as an advertising medium.

At the same time, I think strict ratios are a bit meh. You end up with workarounds like getting proxies to advertise for you to circumvent the strict rules.

I believe a fairer compromise would be a max of 1 self promotion a week for eg and look at it from a high level of how much self promotion traffic is compared to ordinary post ratio from all CCs as a % of all new posts from the community.

My perception is that this ratio is quite small, obviously spiking around new releases on a day to day or even week to week basis.

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yeah, if you self promote then I think a minimum of a "First comment" couple of paragraphs to start discussion is required, as is responding to others in the thread. Posting the link and running isn't okay.

As to ratios: 1:9 seems reasonable to me. I'd rather have a fixed ratio to avoid ambiguity, rather than having mods needing to judge what counts as quality, or making subjective (and therefore inconsistent) decisions.

But at the same time, the rule needs to exist to be enforced.

[–]ButtesVonToots'Murica 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Outside of the specifics of iEarl and whatever led to the ban (of which I do not know and have no opinion on), a very real motivation of being a CC in many cases is because it provides income. If not as a main income, certainly additional money. Many of these contributors run ads, they get paid for that, and so while they want their content to be viewed for the benefit of the community, it would be naive to think that there is not intent to get themselves more widely distributed and viewed to increase subscribers and thus, revenue. That is all being done on the back of Reddit...for no cost...which is why these types of policies exist. Reddit has rules about free advertising for companies and products and a Youtube CC is no different. There is absolutely a fine line to be managed by the benefit of good quality, useful content that the community consumes..as with many of these CC videos versus what can border on self promotion with little other input.

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Sure, I understand that - and I think content which clearly has no relevance or content should be removed: In fact, we do have a rule that excludes things which clearly do not contribute

  1. All posts must relate to World of Warships, or have historic significance to a warship.

But IEG's content was relevant to WoWS, and most agree that it's of fairly high quality.

I do understand that we don't want people just posting links to make money off their content (regardless of the quality of that content) - but if there is to be a rule regarding post ratios it has to be included in the rules, in my opinion.

[–]Renard4Seal 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

That's not the point. The point is that it is advertisement and clearly falls under the "spam" category of reddit. Self-promotion is very clearly defined and has limits everyone has to follow no matter the status. If he wasn't banned from the sub the admins would issue a site-wide ban anyway.

[–]thebonesingeranything that's shooty 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

This is the opposite of surprising - considering I had a very active post removed and it took a literal week to actually get any response from the moderation team about why it was removed [As in, what rule it violated, as it was removed without a moderator even commenting on the post]

Best part is I never even got a straight answer - the moderator who removed the post never actually responded, all I got were replies from other mods who could at best guesstimate at the reason.

YMMV in this subreddit

[–]The_Brofisticus 12 ポイント13 ポイント  (2子コメント)

People don't get banned for giving others negative rep bombs (against "reddiquette") or being inFlamutory ass hats to the community. Why would they ban someone for being a civil content contributor? Seems like a system in which only trolls can thrive.

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Exactly: If Reddiquette is being applied as law then that needs to be explicitly stated. If individual parts of Reddiquette are being applied as rules, they need to be included in the Sub's rules.

Neither of the above is currently the case

[–]GimlzNA Moderator[M] -9 ポイント-8 ポイント  (0子コメント)

If we could see who voted "rep bombs", we would take action. However we as moderators do not have the ability to see if specific groups downvote specific posts/comments. We do only what we have the tools to do.

[–]Insanity-pepperFishling Fleet 13 ポイント14 ポイント  (3子コメント)

Why would there even be a problem with self promotion if what they are promoting contributes to the content of the sub? He could have typed it all out in a reddit post but he put it on youtube instead and linked the video here. The sub gets the same content and we get a cool video.

What did he do? show a mod's gameplay in his weekend warships video?

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (2子コメント)

I'd tend to agree with this, but I've got no idea if most of the community do too

Either way, though, I'm not actually concerned about whether such a rule is implemented and enforced: I'm concerned that it is currently being enforced without existing.

It does seem, though, that the majority of those responding to this thread believe that intent and quality should matter more than merely counting comments

[–]Insanity-pepperFishling Fleet 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

There is a big difference between a shitpost and a link to a quality video that contributes to a conversation or starts one that is relevant to the topic of the sub. I wasn't even aware of this rule (either stated or implied) but that is likely because it is something that would only effect a content contributor. though the title of content contributor being a thing begs the question, why would someone ever be banned for contributing content that is necessary for earning the flair in the first place?

[–]syandaTone. Now. 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Generally because it feels like Reddit's sitewide policy is designed to prevent the Reddit platform from being used as an advertising platform, or for a way for individuals to grow a personal audience (in a way that they can do on Youtube or Twitch, for comparison).

As such, there's a site definition of what constitutes "spam" that, quite frankly, will not match up to our individual definitions of spam. I don't think anyone here, moderators included, feels that iEarlGrey's content is shit. They're all quality content. Unfortunately for us, Reddit (as a platform) doesn't care that it's quality content. If he's posting it on his own and only commenting on his own comment, he's unfortunately skirting really close, if not outright violating the Reddit (not subreddit) policy as to what constitutes spamming. If someone else posted his content (without him outright asking), it would be absolutely, completely fine. If he posted his own content whilst also maintaining comments and community participation, not only on this subreddit, but on reddit as whole, it would be fine. Without the previous two, though, Reddit would consider him to be utilizing Reddit as method of growing his own personal audience, in conflict with the sitewide policy.

[–]SpiderWolve 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Seriously? This is happening again? What a load of bs.

[–]ValetStoleMyChicken 22 ポイント23 ポイント  (3子コメント)

I blame Flamu.

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (0子コメント)

2meta4me

But please can we keep this thread as a serious-ish meta discussion of the sub, rather than streamer/CC banter?

[–]jolly--rogerUnited States Navy 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

NALOL

[–]CaptainABCD 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (3子コメント)

I don't know if Earl was actually banned, but I know that the mods have wrestled with external content creators in the past. Personally, it eludes me why you wouldn't want content on your content sharing platform.

The 9:1 ratio is also nonsensical, since content creators can just ask their fans to post the content on their behalf.

That said, I can understand that the mods want some own activity on the platform. IMO flamu does it smartly: every time he posts own content, he has a nice little synopsis which he posts as a comment. That way, he is not just dumping content, but also providing the grounds for a discussion.

[–]quatchShowing a boardside is step 1 in having a coffin made 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Like this time: https://www.reddit.com/r/WorldOfWarships/comments/5h1qjb/premium_ship_review_uss_missouri_little_white/

[–]syandaTone. Now. 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

The 9:1 ratio is also nonsensical, since content creators can just ask their fans to post the content on their behalf.

This is actually acceptable unless they specifically tell people to upvote the links to their content. The point is, the Reddit admins (not our subreddit moderators) outlined policy against self-promotion as a catch-all to prevent Reddit from being used as an advertising platform.

The issue is that even if it is quality content, Reddit guidelines consider self-promotion to be a form of spamming. Relevant section quoted

We're not making a judgement on your quality, just your behavior on reddit. Your stuff's probably amazing and someone would be really interested in it but...

If you submit mostly your own links and your presence on reddit is mostly for your self-promotion of your brand, page, blog, app, or business, you are more likely to be a spammer than you think! Read the FAQ and make sure that you really understand that.

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

It has been stated (link in OP) that he was banned and for this reason

I agree that there should perhaps be specific guidelines for content creators, and also that if we wish to have a rule for content:commentary ratios (like the 9:1 rule): but right now, neither of those things exist, which makes this ban tenuous.

Whether there's an exclusion given or not, I'd like to see iEarlGrey unbanned and some significant steps taken to clarify this issue for both CCs and the rest of the community. If we have some clear rules and guidelines then that's absolutely fine, and I'd expect all CCs to follow them: but right now it isn't clear, and people are being punished for breaking non-existent rules

[–]LethalDiversion 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (4子コメント)

I've been active on reddit for quite a while.

The enforcement of the 9:1 rule isn't just a "friendly suggestion" but something that site admins (the people who are actually paid by reddit to maintain the community) will actually take action on. I know they don't have it spelled out as a specific rule, and it is often selectively enforced, but it is a thing. Likely to curb spam and other such things. It's controversial in many cases to say the least, but it is a measure designed to prevent spam and prevent people from trying to abuse Reddit to boost their SEO and other such things.

Content creators from Dota2, Hearthstone, and others have been shadowbanned for posting too much of their own self-promoting content without otherwise "contributing" to reddit.

So, even if our moderators were not proactively banning content creators who break the rules, those CCs would still eventually find their posts not being seen, only in the case of shadow bans they are site wide and are only noticed when you see that your posts are no longer being affected by voting.

That said, it's worth noting that there is some leeway, and the admins don't always take action if somebody is breaking the content rule. They try to take into account effort and intent as well, and encourage moderators to do so too.

I honestly think that it may be worth reversing such bans, putting clear guidelines in the sidebar, and giving him a chance to meet those guidelines, since his videos are often relevant and discuss a lot of topics that can be of interest to the community outside of the typical gameplay and guide content.

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (3子コメント)

I know they don't have it spelled out as a specific rule, and it is often selectively enforced, but it is a thing

That, in itself, is enough of a reason not to do it. If it's worth enforcing, it's worth specifying as a rule.

And even if that's how Reddit admins act, I'd hope that our own moderators can be held to a higher standard: they're generally very good, and I don't want a witch hunt - but this has been handled badly and should be handled much better.

The fact is that, as you note, it would take an hour or two of discussion to create the guidelines and add them to the rules page and sidelines.

If iEarlGrey doesn't follow the rules/guidelines once they explicitly exist in a fair format then fine, ban him all you like. Until then, though, quietly banning people for an unofficial rule is unacceptable IMO

[–]LethalDiversion 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (2子コメント)

I do agree with you here. I want to trust in the mods that they didn't just throw a ban at him without warning him, but without knowing the background workings and communications that may or may not have happened, it is hard to know.

I feel like some disclosure and a revamp of the rules would be for the benefit of the community as a whole, so that we don't lose other valuable CCs or suffer a schism like many other gaming subs go through when they get a little bit of growth.

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

It sounds like they did warn him, but they warned him about a rule that didn't exist, which seems unfair.

But as stated elsewhere, my issue here isn't the concept of the rule, it's that the rule is being enforced without actually existing

[–]Renard4Seal -4 ポイント-3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Drop it. The rule does exist. Stop making things up. It's not because reddit rules aren't repeated with the sub's rules that they can freely be ignored.

[–]RAYvenko55 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

i am not actively following neither of the big CCs, but in a game where the #1 topic is lack of skill of the players, every serious CC who is creating content to help ppl to grasp the mechanics and changes in the game is more valuable then some 9:1 whateveritis

just look at the other CCs. Day 1 accounts posting a video/content for them, probably themselves with alts/proxy, so the whole rule is crap if not enforced properly...

[–]Dirk76DigglerMAKEWOWSGREATAGAIN 24 ポイント25 ポイント  (3子コメント)

this sub is going down hill, its because of the anime

[–]antiheld84 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (0子コメント)

poi

[–]antiheld84 -4 ポイント-3 ポイント  (1子コメント)

poi

I blame bucki and hentai.

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

That's kinda sucky. Self Promotion is a tough thing to make rules about. The sub should have a defined 10:1 (or whatever ratio) rule to remove any gray area and prevent this from happening in the future.

My only personal experience with this is in a sub I help mod. We occasionally have users who post about an article they wrote or a podcast they created. All of this was well and good, but when it was the only stuff they post, it was a problem. We started off with a 10:1 ratio (10 non-promotion comments to 1 promoted content) but a few days later lowered it to 5:1.

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I agree that it's a tough thing to make rules about: but the important thing to not here is, I feel, that the rule doesn't actually exist here.

If it did, I'd have no argument (although I believe it should be discussed, and well known/respected content creators should have some limited exemption, but that's my opinion).

But it doesn't

[–]lazercheesecakeBattleship submarines when (lazercheesecake1@NA) 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (2子コメント)

I think that the ban itself caught many people off guard specifically because how much actual community participation he engages. I see him everywhere on this sub, and I was wondering where he had gone off to recently. It actually surprises me that he didn't post 10 times discussion worthy content rather than his own video posts. Regardless of whether he did break the 9:1 rule, I agree with OP that the reason for his ban should be codified as an actual rule or people not be banned at all. This has been an issue in contention since u/Iearlgrey's last ban almost a year ago.

The rule is very well intentioned as well as our amazing mods. I think it should be made into an actual rule, however, before it is enforced.

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Yeah, I've not actually done the math, but from his profile it appears that over a short period of time (~20 posts) he did break the rule: but actually going back a couple of pages, it works out as 10:1 again.

So assuming we take the sensible option and create/enforce this rule (fine by me), can we please have some clarity over how the ratio will be applied?

[–]lazercheesecakeBattleship submarines when (lazercheesecake1@NA) 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I see. Thanks for checking. But honestly clarity and transparency in the mod team and rules would be much appreciated. Also thanks for bringing this discussion up. I'd heard rumors here and there, but didn't know what happened til now.

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

Thank you OP for making a detailed post regarding this.

I was attempting to argue the same thing yesterday but it seemed to fall on deaf ears and downvotes.

[–]Oli847 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

What's the difference between someone writing a wall of text about a topic, and linking a video they made about them discussing the same topic?

How is one self promotion and the other not?

If someone is making posts promoting some kind of paid service, then absolutely, but that's not what these CCs are doing.

[–]Gatekeeper15 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (2子コメント)

There is a reasons that this is a reddiquette guide and not a rule

You expect him to maintain that type of ratio even when hundreds of questions are asked on a post he created? Its not like he is just spamming his post with replies to fluff it up and make it look big, people are asking questions and comments on his material and you are banning him for it even though he also post on other peoples things (its just not enough for your taste). According to you, if he makes a post, he can only reply so many times so that he guards the precious 9:1 "rule". It is ridiculous.

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (1子コメント)

I don't think he should do that at all, I just think there should be a clear, stated rule and that it should be enforced sensibly

[–]Gatekeeper15 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

And I agree. The ban is ludicrous.

[–]Capt_RRyehttps://www.youtube.com/channel/UCkU8r_3twrrfrylm5zzUUEw 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (5子コメント)

Theres something fishy going on on this sub lately. recently ive noticed an increase in instant downvotes on content for both CC and regular users/youtubers. this goes for any content posted. I can only give myself as an example but whenever I post any content (video, picture ect.) there is a downvote or 2 within 10 minutes of the post. But maybe i just need to remove my tinfoil hat.

[–]syandaTone. Now. 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

That's generally pretty much standard for Wargaming games. Pretty sure there's a guy that's spent the past couple years persistently downvoting any video content posted to /r/worldoftanks and /r/worldofwarships. Probably /r/worldofwarplanes too, but I don't even know if there's content there...

[–]PepperMill_NACruiser 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (3子コメント)

I've noticed this too. It's objectionable because a downvote is supposed to indicate that the post adds no value. It is not meant to be disagree with the content.

[–]Capt_RRyehttps://www.youtube.com/channel/UCkU8r_3twrrfrylm5zzUUEw 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (2子コメント)

If that's the intended purpose then honestly the mods should consider just removing the download functionality. Similar to what the official forums dead it removes the ability for people to snub or hide other creators by downloading them into Oblivion. If the contents truly does ADD no value when isn't interesting or entertaining to the community then it simply won't receive any up votes. Or if possible create a timer to when downvotes can be added. Personally I'm tired of seeing every single piece of content posted receive downvotes and disappear from the new section within 10 minutes of being posted.

[–]Swahhillieign: Skalzam 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Mods can't remove the downvote. They can only obscure the button, and they can only do that on the web version of reddit, not for apps.

[–]Capt_RRyehttps://www.youtube.com/channel/UCkU8r_3twrrfrylm5zzUUEw 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Since i never use the mobile version or the app i did not know that was the case.

[–]imiiiiik 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (0子コメント)

so unban him

[–]Silvabane 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

That sucks. His video on the Royal Navy was extremely insightful.

[–]HawkM1 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (4子コメント)

.#UnbanIEarlGrey Why in the world would you ban a CC I mean really.

[–]DBHT14United States Navy -4 ポイント-3 ポイント  (3子コメント)

Just being a CC isn't really a good reason to be protected. But being a non toxic, generally positive community member, who does commit a large amount of time to the topic, who for the most part abides by expected standards is better.

There are plenty of absolutely toxic content makers out there with large followings in many games.

[–]HawkM1 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Sure but Earl has not been Toxic that I have seen unless you can show me otherwise. Also if this rule does not even exist why did he get banned?

[–]DBHT14United States Navy -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

All you asked is why would you ban a CC, I gave a perfectly valid reason why you would in the absence of self promotion, being a toxic presence.

I personally enjoy his presence even if I prefer other CC's to watch over him, and am at least full of questions over the situation and trying to withhold judgement.

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'd agree with this, and I do believe that if you wish to promote yourself on the sub you should also contribute to discussion on the sub.

I just think this rule needs to exist if it's going to be enforced

[–]EvilEyeMonster 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (1子コメント)

It was stated here that iEarlGrey was banned for breaking the 9:1 rule, whereby you must post 9 "general" comments/posts for every 1 self-promotion you post.

no it doesn't where does it say iEarlGrey has been banned in that statment

[–]Gimlz(MacGyver04)NA Moderator[M] 14 points 17 hours ago

We enforce a rule that Content Creators must must a ratio of 9 posts that are not their own content (or comments in a thread they created) to every 1 post that links to their created content. We enforce this rule quite heavily. However, if you haven't noticed, links to flamu's content are posted by different accounts. The only way this would be against the rules were if all these posts were from alternate accounts of his own, and they were tied to the same IP address. etc. As of now, his videos are posted in a fashion that is 100% within the rules, as he is not personally posting them.

He was warned about his behaviour and hasnt posted since.

doesnt automatically means his banned

I enjoy his top quality content here dont get me wrong but you need to get your information right before making allegations

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

The guidelines which have been quoted since that post specifically state that responding to questions/comments on your self promotion count as contributing to the discussion

I'm not making an allegation, I'm asking for discussion and improvement

[–]Alexonfire7Royal Canadian Navy 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

The problem with these rules is that they can be interpreted in different ways by different people. The question here would be the following:

"Does IEarlGrey's videos promote good discussion and provide helpful community, or is it shit that no one cares about and it's irrelevant to the subreddit?"

I feel like he's providing good, informative content. The rest of the subreddit does as well, considering the amount of IEarlGrey material I have seen on the front page before. At that point, so what if he's posting his own videos? At least he's honest with it and doesn't make an alternate account for it or ask one of his friends to do it. That's even more scumbaggy.

[–]Evilsmiley 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Was iearlgrey contacted and warned prior to being banned?

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

No idea, but it's rather beside the point: I'm not specifically looking for a #FreeEarlGrey campaign here (and by the sound of it, the ban has expired) - I'm looking for discussion and clarification/creation of the rule

It doesn't really matter if he was warned, if the rule doesn't exist.

[–]thedavv12 shell bouncing sensei 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

what he was baned? why? mods gone BorkeBack if he spamed the same video or more vids per day whatever. Not like he will get a significant boost of subs from this subreddit.

[–]reivisionDD hunter -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (9子コメント)

The 9:1 guideline does exist in the Reddit-wide policies:

http://www.reddit.com/wiki/selfpromotion

And it is in the rules, though not directly.

Reddit Content Policy > Unwelcome Content > Spam > the primary topic addressed in the "spam" link is self-promotion, with a link to the above self-promotion guidelines.

Now whether this is made visible on /r/WorldofWarships or Reddit as a whole is another issue, and I think what you're getting at in your comments here - it's simply not visible enough and people are not made well enough aware of these Reddit-wide rules.

Fair enough; I think they need to be more visible too. This post is probably helping with that.

As for arguments that CCs should be exempt based on the quality of their content; I don't think so.

/r/WorldofWarships mods simply don't have the jurisdiction to override Reddit-wide content policy.

And there's a whole can of subjective "what makes good/worthy enough content" worms that is endless drama just waiting to happen - and likely why the Reddit-wide policies are worded and defined the way they are in the first place (using numeric assessments of self-promotion rather than quality assessments to define "spam").

My reply to the current top non-mod comment also touches on why debating quality of iEarlGrey's submissions is a red herring.

If you think the Reddit-level policy on self-promotion needs to change, take that up with the Reddit admins, not /r/WorldofWarships mods. Or find another discussion platform to use that has different self-promotion rules.

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (8子コメント)

The self-promotion guidelines are guidelines, not rules. Also, it's noted that they are based on Reddiquette. Reddiquette is explicitly stated to be informal guidelines not rules. So it's a set of guidelines based on unofficial guidelines. They're mentioned from the rules as a helpful way to avoid contention, sure, but they're not rules.

At the end of the day, there's a simple solution here: Add an explicit clause to the WoWS rules on the sidebar stating that the 9:1 rule exists and will be enforced

12 - Anyone posting self-promoting links must have (and maintain) a 9:1 ratio: i.e. only 1 out of every 10 of your submissions should be your own content.

Job done.

I feel like we, as a sub, should also have a discussion of the rules, and how they are enforced etc - but that's mostly separate to this specific discussion regarding an individual (non-existent) rule

[–]Renard4Seal -4 ポイント-3 ポイント  (7子コメント)

It's not up to the sub to challenge reddit's rules, period.

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (6子コメント)

Those aren't Reddit rules, though....

The fact Reddit admins also apply rules badly doesn't excuse this

[–]Renard4Seal -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (5子コメント)

No it is a rule and admins do enforce it, but selectively. Would you prefer the mods escalate it to the admins to solve the case? Because I can guarantee you that while there is some leeway, it is just that. The rules are clear.

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (4子コメント)

No, I'd rather the mods put a specific rule in place.

I'm not saying the rule is a bad idea, I'm saying that enforcing it where it doesn't exist is not a good way to run a community.

I don't care if IEG is banned, I care that he was banned for a rule that was not stated anywhere sensible

[–]Renard4Seal -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (3子コメント)

It's there. When you sign up you agree to a bunch of stuff, including that rules. Reddit admins try to let moderators enforce the rules on smaller subs such as this one, unless they get reports of course. If it can appease you and give everyone a rest, the mods can definitely report him to the admins and let them decide. That'll put an end to that rather pointless debate. But having been there for quite a while, I already know the outcome.

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (2子コメント)

To be clear: Are you saying we shouldn't add a rule to the sidebar making this clear and avoiding the entire issue?

[–]Renard4Seal -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (1子コメント)

I'm clearly saying that it would be redundant.

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I don't believe it is, though, when it is never stated as a rule.

Equally, I signed up to reddit over 3 years ago - I'm going to forget all the rules in that time, that's the reason they're restated.

For the sake of one sentence, this can all be resolved

[–]DemolitionDouggyDannyTheDrifter (EU) TheDrifterDanny (NA) 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I did not know this has happened. This is sad. While people claim self promotion, yeah thats true. Why didn't he just let someone else post his videos first.

Un-ban him, but forbid him from posting a thread? Is that allowed?

[–]The-JerkbagSFWPolan Stronk -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (9子コメント)

I'm not the best at keeping track of dramatics, but from what I've gathered, he was suspended several months ago for not following the rules, and has now been banned for not following the same rule. The rule was stated last time he was "in trouble" and if he can't be bothered to operate within those constraints, then punishment is fair.

Other CCs get around this with other users posting their content on the subreddit, negating the self promotion rule. If no one else is posting his content, is it really worth watching? I admit, I don't think I've ever watched anything IEG has done.

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (6子コメント)

I can't find anything to state that the first ban was for this reason, but regardless the rule didn't exist then any more than it does now.

[–]The-JerkbagSFWPolan Stronk -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (5子コメント)

If it was stated to IEG for that ban, it was brought into existence. There isn't a rule on the sidebar saying no porn, but you can bet someone spamming anime porn would be banned as well after a warning saying "no porn."

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (4子コメント)

If it was stated to IEG for that ban, it was brought into existence

How? As noted by a mod posting in this thread, bans are not discussed publicly... if IEG was silently banned for it, how is anyone else meant to know that's a rule?

The rules are what is stated on the sidebar and in the rules page, surely?

[–]The-JerkbagSFWPolan Stronk -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (3子コメント)

Because someone else, including IEG, would be warned first, as he was the last time he was in trouble for overusing self promotion.

The timeline as I see it is:

  • Several months ago, I forget when, IEG is banned. Word is he was abusing self promotion. Ban expires or he is unbanned or something

  • Life as normal

  • Begins self promoting too much again, after being explicitly told that was the reason behind his last ban

  • Is banned again

And I see no reason for this to be controversial.

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (2子コメント)

It's controversial because if I started posting content tomorrow, I would have no idea that

  • The rule existed (it isn't stated anywhere)
  • Others (IEG) had been warned for it
  • Others had been banned for it

If we have a rule, it needs to be clearly stated.

My issue here isn't specifically that IEG himself has been banned, nor that he was banned without warning (I don't know if that's the case or not, and I think it's irrelevant) - my issue is that there is literally no rule against this.

There is no rule in the sidebar, there is nothing in the rules page, there's nothing in the content policy: the only thing that exists is a set of informal etiquette guidelines, with nothing to state that the guidelines will be enforced.

If the sidebar even said "Reddiquette is enforced as law", then fine... but as it is, I have no way to know what counts as a rule and what doesn't.

When a red/orange large box saying THE RULES exists on the sidebar, and something is not included in that box, it seems reasonable to assume there is no rule against said thing, surely?

[–]The-JerkbagSFWPolan Stronk 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Well for one thing, it applies to a very tiny subsection of the community, and so far has only come up for one person. One person breaking a rule doesn't necessitate a broadcast to everyone.

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

It's come up for one person we know of, but the fact is that bans are hidden, we have no idea whether it's impacted anyone else.

And the fact remains, for me, that if something can get you banned, it should be stated: either directly with a 9:1 rule, or with an explicit "We will always enforce the Reddit content policy, and reserve the right to enforce the Reddiquette guidelines at any time" rule, which makes those implicit rules expicit

[–]CaptainABCD 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (1子コメント)

I just want to make a quick comment on your second point. I understand your logic and where you are coming from.

But tolerating promotions by a CC's fans could quickly lead to a winner-takes-it-all scenario: a CC who is marginally more popular or started earlier attracts more fans, who in return cross-post his content, allowing him to gain an even larger following, who can then cross-post his content even more.

Under such a system, it would be very hard for a newcomer or marginally less attractive CC to gain clout.

[–]The-JerkbagSFWPolan Stronk -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

You have a point, but just because one CC is being posted doesn't mean that the others necessarily CAN'T be posted. If he/she has even one follower, then they can post the content without repercussion and then the subreddit as a whole can judge the quality of the content.

[–]kgskippy10Paint me like one of your French girls[M] -30 ポイント-29 ポイント  (46子コメント)

We don't discuss bans widely within the community, and it is kept within modmail. Regardless, we follow the rediquette very closely and if you have any problems with it I suggest you contact the mods in modmail.

[–]Kruaal 23 ポイント24 ポイント  (9子コメント)

An explanation as to how people can get banned, apparently without breaking rules, would be quite important to the wider audience, though.

[–]kgskippy10Paint me like one of your French girls -5 ポイント-4 ポイント  (8子コメント)

Constantly breaking the reddiquette can bet you a ban.

[–]Kruaal 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

If it is the obscure 9:1 rule, then it is hilariously pointless, if not outright counter productive, in the case of content creators. This reddit is about a game that guy and many others are creating content for.

Is it really in the interest of this subreddit and the people who come here to read and write about the game when you ban people who go beyond that by way of creating more content to read and write about? I'm referring to actual Wargaming Community Contributors here...

[–]Evilsmiley 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (6子コメント)

But that isn't in the rules

[–]CommanderShepderpKutkabouter - Protector of the Saltmines -5 ポイント-4 ポイント  (1子コメント)

No, it's common sense.

[–]Evilsmiley 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Regardless he shouldn't be banned for not following something that is not actually a rule of this subreddit.

[–]syandaTone. Now. -4 ポイント-3 ポイント  (3子コメント)

It's not in the rules because it's supposed to be something implicitly followed while utilizing the reddit platform.

[–]Evilsmiley 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (2子コメント)

So it's not in the rules but you can still get banned for not following it. So it's a secret rule?

[–]skoorvielSinking ships is my business, and the business is good! 19 ポイント20 ポイント  (13子コメント)

Sweeping things under the carpet is not the way to deal with a community. Keep in mind that by choosing to become a moderator you choose to serve the community, not the other way around. You will get back-lashes like this from the community if you insist on working behind the scenes, Gestapo/Soviet Union style. If the community on a whole disagrees with something, change it.

I'm glad you opened mod applications again, I feel like we need more folks who can deal and engage the community properly. Maybe we will get some this time.

[–]Trump-For-LifeRanked: Wallet Size Matters! 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (6子コメント)

"Alabama ST" is the term that comes to mind.

You're 100% right- I said this as a moderator (Of an unrelated subreddit), and it still is true:

"My job is to serve you. If I've made you happy, I've done my job well. If I cannot please you, then I have failed, regardless of whatever I have done. I am not your boss here, I am your custodian, and it is my duty to serve at your beck and call"

No wonder I spend so much more time on the Discord....

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (1子コメント)

This is an excellent post, summing up my theory of community moderation nicely

[–]Trump-For-LifeRanked: Wallet Size Matters! 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

If you look through my history, it's easy to tell where I moderated (Really, my name is a dead giveaway too. Never should have changed it, but that's a story for another day). The needs of a moderator there were very different, but the same rule applies.

Moderators exist to serve the people. The fact that this many people have come to this discussion is clear and apparent proof that there is a problem. A community this size having such a large, robust discussion shows that something needs to be fixed

[–]DBHT14United States Navy 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

I think that actually gets to the heart of the matter, perhaps we as a community simply need to be more clear about where we want to sub to go. This is a good opportunity for part of that discussion, but just having explosions when things get to a point isn't helpful for us as member of mods trying to manage things as volunteers.

And that of course doesn't mean we are going to see stricter moderation if the sub doesn't want it. My two most common subs are r/CFB for college football and r/AskHistorians both have extremely divergent approaches to moderation but both work because they are meshed with members expectations.

[–]GDFKTT[Alpha] 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Exactly, it is ABSOLUTELY CONTEXTUAL based on both rules and community expectations.

Just look at rule 2 here for example:
We have all seen people post meme/rage comics/satire picture content here from time to time. Are all those users getting banned? Nope - because it makes sense.

Okay lets talk about rule 4, no duplicate posts:
Have I seen duplicative posts by others across threads? Yup.
I have ever duplicated/combined aspects of some of my posts (such as data) and reposted into other relevant threads? Yup.
Were any of us banned for it? Nope - because it makes sense.

Now lets compare that against a completely unwritten "rule" that is not even a current real written rule here:
Does iEarlGrey post low quality content and actively shove lots of high quality content off the front page? Nope.
Does he even usually post his own stuff more than once in a 24-36 hour cycle? Nope. Do the things that he post generate lots of POSITIVE community discussion and engagement in this sub even if he doesn't actually post in other people's posted content? Yup.
Was he banned for his actions? Yup - because...hey wait a second! I see a correlation that SHOULD be here but isn't.

I'm not suggesting a Mod had a vendetta or anything of the sort, but clearly IMHO the decision was questionable.

[–]NotHere001Reign over the Frosted Heavens 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Discord? laughs

[–]Trump-For-LifeRanked: Wallet Size Matters! 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

It ain't perfect, but it's less toxic.

And, yes, I know who you are there ;)

[–]kgskippy10Paint me like one of your French girls -4 ポイント-3 ポイント  (5子コメント)

This isn't the first time that we've dealt with something like this and it won't be the last. We serve the community by the rules that are already in place. If you have suggestions for new rules I am willing and open to listen to them.

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (4子コメント)

We serve the community by the rules that are already in place.

What rules!?!?!? This isn't a rule! That's literally the entire point.

If you have suggestions for new rules I am willing and open to listen to them.

This thread is absolutely full of them, but specifically we (or rather, most of those responding to this thread) would like this rule to actually become part of the subreddit rules, and for any previous bans for breaking this rule to be lifted.

[–]syandaTone. Now. 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (3子コメント)

Essentially, he's referring to this set of guidelines. The issue is, by using the reddit platform, we're all consenting to follow the reddit-outlined guidelines. The subreddit-specific rules are what's on top of the existing ruleset. Having been active in other communities, I have seen the reddit admins shadowban content creators for failing to adhere to these guidelines, and at least in one case, the content creator either failed to have the ban reversed, or ceased posting on reddit completely.

For the record, I have been shadowbanned in the past for violating reddiquette, for that matter (basically, liberal use of downvotes on a sub I wasn't subscribed to).

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Sure, but those guidelines are based on the Reddit Rules (rules) and Reddiquette (which are informal, as noted elsewhere)

Rules and guidelines are two different things.

I agree that this is a Reddit-wide issue, but it doesn't change the fact that it's being badly handled here on WoWS

[–]syandaTone. Now. 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Like I brought up - informal or not, violation of Reddiquette (which I agree is a guideline) has resulted in tangible sanctions on subreddits and users in the past. Failing to adhere to the guidelines can, have, and will result in sitewide sanctions applied to accounts. If anything, moderator actions to draw attention to the reddiquette does more to protect the subreddit users from getting sanctioned by the admins by issuing a reversible warning that their subreddit-specific actions may be in violation of sitewide policy.

For the record, I really don't dispute that iEarlGrey puts out quality content, and frankly, I think he should be allowed to post his own stuff. Unfortunately for all parties involved, it's not our subreddit's call to make.

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I don't necessarily disagree with you, but if our moderators are banning people for it, it should exist as a rule in this subreddit

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 16 ポイント17 ポイント  (12子コメント)

I'm sorry, but this isn't a good response.

Regardless, we follow the rediquette very closely

Why? Reddiquette is not a rule. It's explicitly stated in the Reddiquette:

Reddiquette is an informal expression of the values of many redditors

Reddiquette doesn't even state that you must follow a 9:1 rule, just that it is used on many subreddits. But not on ours. Regardless, while I agree that it can be good to expect Redditors to generally follow Reddiquette, anything that is a specific rule should be stated explicitly

and if you have any problems with it I suggest you contact the mods in modmail

As /u/Kruaal points out, this is not a personal concern, this is clearly important to the wider community: 31 upvotes in under an hour, 44 comments, most of which appear to disagree with the mod's stance... but you want to discuss it privately?

I believe this is worth discussing openly, and I don't understand why you'd want to take it to private messaging other than to sweep the issue under the carpet.

I'd like to know

  1. Why was iEarlGrey banned for breaking a rule that does not exist. Noting that Reddiquette is not a set of rules, but is a set informal guidelines?
  2. Will iEarlGrey be unbanned, since he has not broken any rules?
  3. Will you and the other moderators discuss (with community input) and implement the creation of a clear set of rules and guidelines specific to this subreddit?

If #1 is as simple as "We had been enforcing Reddiquette as a rule, but understand that the community perhaps disagrees", then fine, but that only makes #2 and #3 more important.

And if the answer to #2 or #3 above is negative, please could you tell us why?

[–]kgskippy10Paint me like one of your French girls -7 ポイント-6 ポイント  (11子コメント)

  1. He was banned for repeatedly going against the rule/ guideline. We very rarely hand out bans based on this but it became a special case after a number of warnings had already been given out.

  2. It was a temporary ban. Its not permanent.

  3. We can.

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (10子コメント)

He was banned for repeatedly going against the rule/ guideline

It isn't a rule, and guidelines exist as a "How to avoid breaking the rules" or "How to do things well", not as rules.

It was a temporary ban. Its not permanent.

Great, let's make it less temporary by unbanning him. If he breaks the rule after one exists, then go right ahead and ban him again, I'm cool with that.

We can

Excellent, let's do that then: Would you like to change the stickied post in this thread from "Take it to modmail" to "Clearly this is an issue, let's discuss what the rule should be so that we can create it and add it to the sidebar"?

[–]GimlzNA Moderator[M] -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (9子コメント)

Audigex, he isn't currently banned.

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (8子コメント)

Cool - although as noted, bans aren't discussed publicly, so we have no way of knowing that.

So that nicely removes the second point - so how do we go around addressing the fact that the rule doesn't exist (other than in loose, informal guidelines) and creating a sensible rule that the community is happy with?

[–]GimlzNA Moderator -6 ポイント-5 ポイント  (7子コメント)

See the sticky we've posted at the top of this thread. You points are now answered and proven wrong.

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (6子コメント)

Apart from that they don't prove me wrong at all, IEG didn't even break the guideline (not rule) over his last 100 posts.

You accuse me of being argumentative, but all I see is you defending a fairly poor position rather than trying to engage with the community and improve things

[–]GimlzNA Moderator[M] -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (5子コメント)

https://www.reddit.com/user/iEarlGrey

Yes he did. three posts in a row, comments only his his threads. That breaks the rule.

[–]audigexWG EU - Spoiling you since 2016. Double Overpen [2OP][S] 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (4子コメント)

THERE IS NO RULE

But if we go off the link you posted, which lays out guidelines, there's nothing to state you can't post several threads in a row.

Over 100 posts by IEG, 10 are self promoting. How does that break the rule (which, still, doesn't exist)

[–]ALRidgeRunner 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (3子コメント)

Regardless, we follow the rediquette very closely

You mean the rediquette that Reddit itself says is just a general guideline and not any sort of hard and fast rule? This was your exact same line, and my exact same response, when we went through this last time with Zoup. You guys made a mistake then and you've made a mistake now.

Slap whomever's wrist needs to be slapped, fix this, and lets move on. Or, revel in the drama. Unfortunately, nothing drives post count and interest in an internet community like when it feeds on itself.

[–]Trump-For-LifeRanked: Wallet Size Matters! 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Zoup was banned too?

[–]DBHT14United States Navy 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (1子コメント)

A while ago I think, like I want to say in the Spring? Was temporary as well obviously.

[–]Trump-For-LifeRanked: Wallet Size Matters! 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

<Facepalms>

[–]Dirk76DigglerMAKEWOWSGREATAGAIN 13 ポイント14 ポイント  (0子コメント)

If you're going to ban a quality CC over something like this the sub is doomed.

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

"Reddiquette is an informal expression of the values of many redditors, as written by redditors themselves. Please abide by it the best you can."

They aren't rules, they're guidelines. If people aren't banned for negative rep bombs for having a valid opinion (quote below), they shouldn't be for being a positive member of the community.

"In regard to voting Downvote an otherwise acceptable post because you don't personally like it. Think before you downvote and take a moment to ensure you're downvoting someone because they are not contributing to the community dialogue or discussion. If you simply take a moment to stop, think and examine your reasons for downvoting, rather than doing so out of an emotional reaction, you will ensure that your downvotes are given for good reasons."

[–]ShekelBankerNow you see me, now you're dead -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (2子コメント)

So you willingly ban a pretty significant content creator from the main and only (afaik) reddit of the game, for a rule that doesn't exist.

Does your boss even know what are you doing? Does WG really need more negative publicity considering the amounts of screw-ups and #justWargamingthings (ninja overhauls of entire ship lines, multitude of still unfixed bugs) they've done not only with WoWS, but WoT as well?

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

Does WG really need more negative publicity

I'm sure they're really red-faced over the actions of volunteer moderators on a fan-run section of a third-party website.

[–]kgskippy10Paint me like one of your French girls[M] 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm not sure what you mean by "Does your boss even know you're doing". Wargaming isn't involved in any of the moderation this sub.

[–]Monolith12[EU] 4safetypurposes | [NA] 4potatoepurposes || #cvrework2017 -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Maybe we should just define a subscriber threshold like 10.000+ subs on Youtube and make CCs above that threshold exempt from the rule.