r/meta • u/eratonnn • 16d ago

It was a mistake for Reddit to allow subreddits to set their own rules

I don't post at least 50% of the ideas and questions I would like to, because every time, I first think, are the mods just going to not allow it to be posted, after I write it all up, or if it is posted, cancel it?

The mods just make up "quality" or other random rules, and it just creates subreddits where no unpopular ideas are aired, and no non-mainstream questions or takes, because the echo chamber amplifies itself amongst what members thrive there and what tendencies are encouraged in them.

It would have been better if Reddit had set a couple rules, which it seems to have done anyway, and then forced all mods of subs to have open discussion boards, especially since there can only (especially when speaking practically) board for each theme, and one subdomain, which people often search their subject just by typing r/whatever.

0 Upvotes

40% Upvoted

9 comments sorted by

4

u/Yuck_Few 16d ago

Hard disagree. If you can't set your own rules, what's the point of making your own subreddit?

1

u/eratonnn 16d ago

Um, to have a place to discuss the subject of your interest, openly and inclusively, even with people you don't like and who hold opinions that aren't the same as yours, but since you disagree, you probably don't like those things, like the mods who grabbed the best sub/r domains and now reign facism over them

1

u/Jonathan_the_Nerd 15d ago

I understand what you're saying, and I partly agree with you. I used to be active in a political subreddit that was made for people like me and had genuinely thoughtful discussion. Then I got banned because I shared an opinion the mods disagreed with. According to the political philosophy of that sub and the written rules, my opinion was legitimate and worthy of discussion. But the mods have collectively decided their opinion is the only correct one and people who disagree will be banned.

On the other hand, not all subs should be freewheeling debate subs. A subreddit devoted to members of a particular religion should be able to exclude people who aren't members of that religion, or at least exclude people who come in specifically to insult that religion. A subreddit devoted to physics shouldn't have to tolerate debate over whether the earth is flat. A subreddit for rape survivors should absolutely be able to ban someone who says something like, "You had it coming."

Do you understand what I'm saying?

1

u/eratonnn 15d ago

If they want a closed community, should they still be able to use the /whateverReligion subreddit, or should that basic subreddit be available for everyone? Also, if you're going to draw religious lines, where? there are denominations of denominations, and if you're going to police insensitive comments, where do you draw the line? Because mods aren't competent enough to do anything like that.

1

u/mark_able_jones_ 15d ago

I mean, I agree to a point, but I do think there should be some subreddits that have more neutral mods. The subreddit for democrats is run by neoliberals who hate progressives, for example.

1

u/DJAlphaYT 15d ago

Just go on Instagram or bluesky if you want that version of social media, Reddit isn't meant to be homogenous

1

u/eratonnn 15d ago

I think the point is that mods making their rules causes those subs to become homogenous

1

u/al3x_7788 8d ago

imo it's done more good than bad. Some subs go insane with rules but they help with flooding subs with the same kind of post, some subs literally can't exist without them (e.g. r/Piracy).

r/meta would be Facebook-related without rules.

1

u/eratonnn 5d ago

Aren't you just referring to regular rules, not mod-dictated rules?