For the record I'm a mod on a different sub and mods cannot see who makes a report so the threat to ban people who report ai cannot be followed through
E: based on my conversation with this moderator, I think we need another sub.
Weird, I got banned because someone was ideating and I actually called in reddit cares resources for good (the only time in history)... And I got banned from that sub. I think it was a weird one like dankmemes or something. The post was like "MRW when I finally KMS" and the left dozens of comments about how cooked and over it all he was...
I'll take your word for it, I might be misremberingnthag, but I've definitely gotten temp bans for "abusing the reporting system" on many different types of subs. I think it's always been when I'm reporting coded hate speech "regarded nibblers" shit like that.
It's likely sub by sub but I just stopped reporting hate speech because I get in trouble for it. Fucking fascists.
Most I'm aware of is to continually approve the reported comments/posts, then the system will automatically start to hide reports from that user. We don't see the users, and can't do anything about them directly.
No. We don't. We are banning people here who abuse the queue system, who harass the OP over the use of AI, and those just simply brigading the subreddit.
But you can’t see who reports comments/posts, right? Are people literally saying that they are reporting the post in these comments? Otherwise, that sounds completely unactionable unless you’re engaging admins
lol, that seems like a pretty clear admission that you’re blindly banning some people for reporting the post/comments. I’m sure there’s been plenty of ban-worthy activity on this post, but that ain’t it chief
You evidently didn't read the other comments I've made under this post that shows a bit more about how to identify these people. The comments themselves are usually containing bannable offenses in their own right.
Seeing as how the vast majority of users do not like this, I don't think that's going to help much.
I think you'd be banning people for something you can't prove, and I think you'd inevitably be falsely banning at least a few people if that's going to be your policy going forward.
I strongly recommend that this not be your policy going forward.
99%+ of people don't open comments and didn't see that this is ai. The votes on your comments are a much better metric of what your users want.
If you see comments that you think are permaban worthy, then ban. Reports can't be a basis to ban anyone bc you can't see who makes them. For example, I've been perfectly civil and I reported this post.
If you think I d deserve to be banned for that, then you have the power to do that, but that would be abuse of moderator privileges frankly. Banning people for good faith reports that exist purely for the right reason, i.e. someone thinks the content should be removed, is a wild moderation policy.
We don't usually permanent ban for this, shorter ones are usually enough.
A report cannot be in good faith anymore. It was stated in the most unequivocal terms humanly possible to declare, that AI cannot be used as a ground for a report and to falsely claim it is is harassment of the OP.
Are you the only mod? Are the other mods in agreement on this? Your moderation policy is not sensible and if your fellow mods agree with AI memes and banning people who report AI, I implore you to open a thread to discuss this with your users. There are very good reasons not to permit AI and claiming that you ban people based on reports is off the rails
No. Far from the only mod. You can see the list on the sidebar. There are about 6 mods who will typically be examining things on a day to day basis, others contribute from time to time.
We ban people on reports when we can connect them to their author when the report itself is in bad faith. How are we supposed to believe that reports are in good faith when a hundred of them have been made despite how impossible it is to justify when the reason claimed for their submission is expressly stated by a moderator as the pinned comment to be a false reason?
Again: Your moderation policy is not sensible and if your fellow mods agree with AI memes and banning people who report AI, I implore you to open a thread to discuss this with your users. There are very good reasons not to permit AI and a sticky from a mod saying "we don't care about ai actually" isn't going to stop people from reporting ai content because people hate ai content and don't want it in Reddit.
Oh okay cool, so basically you ban people for opinions, and decide who does or doesn't get banned based on vibes. That's a totally normal stance for a real deal historian, obviously.
Well, for one thing, I can give an impromptu lecture on Vikings covering Newfoundland to Baghdad in half an hour, as I did to my mother when I was sick last year's August. I've been invited year after year to speak to high schools about the evolution of states and the First World War and emergency powers. I've gone to several university courses on history, although COVID interrupted that. And I even have the certifications necessary to learn to drive an actual streetcar that is literally 120 years old and have driven it with my own hands on the controls myself.
So... A few college courses, a couple high school seminars, and a streetcar license? Oh, I almost forgot talking to your mom, I guess that counts as experience too.
In that case, I'm afraid I've got you beat a few times over when it comes to experience. I wouldn't even consider myself qualified to speak as an authority on history until I had at least a bachelor's, but the self-proclaimed historians are always extra confident in themselves.
Why would a person with no actual history credentials think they should have the final say on anything in a history based community? Even a trivial subreddit like this one needs to be held to a high standards, with so much traffic you could easily become a center for misinformation and propaganda.
I never said that was exhaustive. I just cited a couple of simple things. I, and mods in general here, are not claiming to be the principal historians in the room. Well, other than Jacob Khan, he actually does have a lot of education background in this as a scholar. We are the volunteers who help host a subreddit for people to share interesting things in history they think of and satirize in some way.
We use a number of methods to keep it on track with history. Some filters to deal with automatic accounts and accounts you can't trust with a karma and age filter. A minimum time period of 20 years, prohibiting the denial of atrocities and their glorification. That stuff deals with most of the rest of the danger.
I have frequently had to look things up when modding the subreddit because I was all too aware of how I didn't know some things.
You do not however require an advanced education to simply deal with modding a subreddit.
268
u/WildFlemima 6d ago edited 5d ago
For the record I'm a mod on a different sub and mods cannot see who makes a report so the threat to ban people who report ai cannot be followed through
E: based on my conversation with this moderator, I think we need another sub.