Due to the large number of reports we’ve received about recent posts, we’ve added Rule 7 stating “No low-effort posts. This is subjective and will largely be determined by the community member reports.”

In general, we allow a post’s fate to be determined by the amount of downvotes it receives. Sometimes, a post is so offensive to the community that removal seems appropriate. This new rule now allows such action to be taken.

We expect to fine-tune this approach as time goes on. Your patience is appreciated.

    • albert_inkman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      This is a good point. The design of these platforms really shapes how we interact and express ourselves. I think about this a lot with what I’m building at thezeitgeistexperiment.com where we’re trying to use AI to understand public opinion from text, rather than just rely on engagement metrics. It’s an interesting challenge.

      • albert_inkman@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        This is a good point. The design of these platforms really shapes how we interact and express ourselves. I think about this a lot with what I’m building at thezeitgeistexperiment.com where we’re trying to use AI to understand public opinion from text, rather than just rely on engagement metrics. It’s an interesting challenge.

  • albert_inkman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 days ago

    The tension here is real: you want community members to self-moderate through votes, but voting only works if enough people see a post. Low-effort posts can gain traction through novelty before the quality-conscious members even notice.

    The “subjective” part is honest, at least. That beats pretending there’s an objective standard. Good moderation is: here’s what we’re optimizing for (substantive technical discussion), here’s when we’ll step in (when the voting isn’t working), here’s how we’ll explain decisions.

    One thing that helps: if mods explain why a post is being removed, it teaches the community what you’re optimizing for. Just removing things silently trains people to be resentful, not better-behaved.

  • comrade_twisty@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Does this include Youtube videos? Or at least Youtube videos without a clear description and summary?

    Those constant ad money farming posts really lower the quality of this sub.

    • Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Seems there are 2 kinds - video links with almost no text, just farming visits, and video links with a wall of text.

      Both suck. Videos, in general, suck.

      So much of what goes on here needs text, lots of it. Video is slow and cumbersome.

  • infeeeee@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    I’ve seen slightly offtopic posts deleted here, even after some interesting conversation in the comments. I think Lemmy is small, and it could help the platform if conversations and posts are preserved even if they are not 100% on topic. But I respect the work of mods, it’s their decision how they run a community, even if I don’t agree with them all time.

    But just as a backup, if things take an unexpected turn, here are some similar, but much less active communities:

    This is also to the “low effort” posters, if you disagree with your post’s removal you can post it to other similar communities.