703
since 4 years, 5 months ago
39 of 39
Tip Reveddit Real-Time can notify you when your content is removed.
your account history
Tip Check if your account has any removed comments.
view my removed comments you are viewing a single comment's thread.
view all comments
Can you please do something about mods running many subreddits at once? /u/awkwardtheturtle is not the only problem amongst the mods…
Seriously, fuck supermods.
Here's a thought: guys who go out of their way to run as many subs as they can don't have the interpersonal and social skills required to manage other people.
Soudns silly to some, but yes, this place is big enough to require some level of democracy. Right now is a mess when the mods are not in the mood,, theres no way to appeal because they are both judge and jury
I'm thinking:
Limit the amount of subs one can mod.
Limit the amount of mod appointments mods can make to three a year or so. Use it or lose it system. And that's global - three across the entirety of reddit, not just per sub.
Users must be able to vote on mods. You've got polls, reddit, might as well use them for something besides harvesting user data.
His thinking is exactly why a vote won’t work lol , anything moderated by majority turns into a cesspool fast
Yeah, because the mods right now are doin' a stellar fucking job, aren't they?
That's sarcasm, by the way.
Allow for mods to be voted out then? If you have a toxic community that would continuously vote out mods then the mods aren’t the issue. Maybe the vote could be triggered by admin if the mod has X number of reports against them in a day? Quick check to see if they are being brigaded then all the subs they mod get a vote to kick them out. I don’t know the best mechanics obviously. But there was to be a way to make that work.
While they are at it add in a system to double check if mods are inactive or missing from subs. Hopefully this will avoid any unfortunate issues
You're assuming that the only reason to vote a mod out is because the community is toxic, with no thought as to the possibility of the mod being toxic.
Usual participation rules for voting could apply: voters must have X amount of posts in the sub over a certain time period, must have been subscribed for a certain time period, accounts must be be older than a certain amount of time.
This would negate all the pearl-clutching of "B-B-B-BUT WHAT IF BERNIE BROS BRIGADE MY MAGA SUB!" others are doing in this thread.
Meh, maybe subreddits should stop chasing exponential growth if you're having trouble handling it.
Mods just want a bunch of people to powertrip over - offering users input on the direction of a sub would, for the mods, be entirely contrary to why they took up moderations in the first place, no?
Of course a mod would say that.
They're never popular.
Seriously? Most mod actions are anonymous. You can't tell who removed your post or banned you unless they leave a comment in response, and often they'll just use throwaway accounts specifically for moderating.
Not to mention the potential for brigading. How would you feel if you had a nice little liberal community, and suddenly a million Trump supporters (or vice versa, a small conservative community and a million Bernie bros) decided to mass subscribe, vote all the moderators out, and take over the sub?
Any democratic system that has the power to do anything useful, will also have the potential to be abused in a way that requires personal action from the admins.
Excellent point! They shouldn't be.
Make so that all mod actions must be transparent and the actual username of the mod who performed the action should be public. That would cut down on most of the powertripping, since most mods are cowards. It would also help prevent the mods closing around a shitty mod, as they're want to do.
It's amazing how quick neckbeards are to embrace fascism.
Literally just said how that wouldn't help.
And since users will be able to vote on mods, they'll be able to vote out the sockpuppet!
Combined with my other efforts - that you're ignoring to make this particular point (limiting mod appointments) - it'll be less of a problem than you wish it would be.
So you're saying that the only way to make serious change is to keep voting out all the moderators faster than the head mod is allowed to appoint them.
The thing you're missing here is that the internet is fundamentally different from real life. This model works fine for electing city council in real life, but it won't work on reddit, because:
A. Barrier to entry. You can't just barge in on the vote without an address in the city, which is a significant investment. Online, subscribing to a subreddit is a single click. This ensures that city council is elected by the people who will actually be affected by their policy.
B. One person, one vote. You can't create a new account in real life, that's called voter fraud. But on reddit, anyone with a VPN can make as many accounts as they want without the admins being able to easily stop them, including the moderators. Both sides of mod votes would be filled with bots, leading to much more work for the admins to counter all the fraud.
C. Hybridization. The current version of your suggestion keeps the appointment system for mods, which is pitting a non-democratic system against a democratic one. If moderator appointments are given out based on time, then malicious voters just have to outrace them. If they're given out based on sub growth, that just creates yet another incentive for bot floods.
D. Mob mentality. Reddit as a company really doesn't like when large groups of users chase down a single target. That's what got MGTOW finally banned. The entire point of this system is to systematically hunt down and eject powermods from all the subs they're modded in. There's a pretty obvious conflict there.
Personally, I don't think it's a viable strategy to take a system that works in one context and slap it onto a completely different situation. That said, this is a nearly unsolvable problem, so any replacement system is going to be deeply flawed- it just needs to be better than what we have now. And I don't think a vote of no confidence system is that.
Oh yeah because that's working fucking amazingly with the voting system. It's not like entire subs just get watered down to the same meme images board no matter the rules.
It's like if none of you motherfuckers understand what a fucking subreddit is. It's a forum. Each one. You can make your own, right now. It's a goddamn button.
You could make a million subs if you just had the dexterity to click the button fast enough. Then you'd be a mod too, woah. Noone would probably want to see your shit content but you know. Not the pont, is it?
Just unsubscribe from the sub they moderate if you are going to a whiny bitch about. You can just leave. Because it's the fucking internet.
What is that you all fucking support so much? Free market. Yeah, that. Free market of subreddits. Except the consequences aren't "losing your entire livelyhood", they are absolutely fucking zero.
I'll tell you what happens when you let people vote on reddit: it gets manipulated within seconds and now all your mods are way more shit. But I guess it's a brand of shit that you agree with so it's fine. Because God forbid you don't feel welcome and make your own place. No everyone has to confirm to your shit feelings and shit opinions. Otherwise it's mod abuse because the second you don't have all the power in a situation you start fucking crying.
I am so fucking tired of all of y'all fucking whine of the week. Shut The Fuck Up.
Ooooh! So much neckbeard rage! So much impotent anger! Let it all out, buddy! Spare the kids on the COD server for just one night!
Someone needs a hug
This place can control real-world politics. It should have government oversight and be treated as a public service.
Mods shouldn't be even allowed to ban people. That's why we get power tripping mods like that.
Remove the ban/suspension feature and watch the power tripping die down quickly.
Mods could still delete posts or comments but without the ability to ban people from subs it would really go a long way to prevent mod abuse because aside stalking the user mods couldn't abuse their power.
Excellent idea. Mods should be focused on the posts, not the users.
I don't care enough about them to learn their proper name.
Guess I'm just not enough of a superus- sorry, "poweruser" to be hip to the lingo, daddy-o.
No, I call them "mobiles", because the world's bigger than the narrow sliver of basement your mum lets you live in, you Septic arsehat.
Jannies.
Can I call people the whine about them "Power Whiners"? Because for 12 years it's been nothing but a stream of "waaah I got banned for being a piece of shit, I'm being oppressed because I can't be a cunt!"
Gooooo fuck yourself.
The Minnesota sub had to split because the head mod is on a power trip banning anyone who doesn't agree with him.
He also mods nonewnormal, so lots of people don't agree with him...
Reminds me of the Canada subreddit.
Looking at you, r/news mods
The reddit admins did that on purpose. They recently removed the top mod and replaced him with whoever they wanted. They did the same in /r/inthenews, and possibly others.
Is this why they lock threads that go against neoliberal orthodoxy? I always know it's gonna be good when a /r/news thread shows up on the front page with 10s of thousands of upvotes, awards, thousands of comments, and it's locked.
... also getting paid and paying other mods to do so.
Can I second and third this?
Oh look, it's reddits Reeeee of the week.
I've been here 12 years. You will forget about it within the month. Then you'll jump on the next, and the next.
Whiny fucking bitches, all of you.