Please give subs a marking for if they are on all or not

submitted by [deleted] from self.SaidIt

[deleted]

all 8 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]magnora7 11 insightful - 4 fun11 insightful - 3 fun12 insightful - 4 fun -  (7 children)

Not a bad idea.

For now the way to check is to go to moderation log for that sub, then change the 'filter by action' dropdown menu to "edit settings".

If the sub is not on /all you will see an entry saying "edited settings (toggle allow in default/trending lists)"

Not ideal, but this is the way to check for sure by yourself.

[–][deleted]  (6 children)

[deleted]

    [–]magnora7 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (5 children)

    Yeah I guess so. It's very rare it would be used more than once though, so normally there will just be 1 or 0 entries.

    Better than nothing, just trying to explain the options we already have available

    [–][deleted]  (4 children)

    [deleted]

      [–]magnora7 6 insightful - 4 fun6 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 4 fun -  (3 children)

      That's a good idea, but maybe something even more clear than an icon would be good. Like maybe in the sidebar it could automatically say "not on /all" if it is off of /all. Plus as another thought it's rare people would be browsing subs not on /all intermingled with ones that are, so the use case might be limited

      [–][deleted]  (2 children)

      [deleted]

        [–]magnora7 6 insightful - 4 fun6 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 4 fun -  (1 child)

        Ah I see, gotcha. Makes sense. Yeah I agree it should be easier to tell, I'll add that to our list of potential upgrades

        [–]ISaidWhatISaid 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

        Why don't you just read the rules associated with each sub to determine what kind of sub you're on?

        [–][deleted]  (2 children)

        [deleted]

          [–]ISaidWhatISaid 6 insightful - 4 fun6 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 4 fun -  (1 child)

          Well, they are a radical feminist sub that was created in opposition to /r/GenderCritical who were banning them for being even more radical than the GC feminists themselves are, so of course they're going to censor people, that's what feminists do. Remember, they too are just another flavour of SJW so control of the public discourse and censorship is in their DNA. It's interesting though that you bring them up as an example because I had once looked them up myself on Reddit to see what they were about and IIRC they seemed to have their rules very clearly stated on their side bar. Makes me wonder, why don't they just copy-paste whatever they had on Reddit here, perhaps with some changes?

          [–][deleted]  (1 child)

          [deleted]

            [–]ISaidWhatISaid 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

            That's my sub BTW. I wouldn't call that a debate about rules, rather, someone patrolling my sub to find faults with it barged in, openly accused me of being a TRA (I am not, I despise TRAs), then accused me of violating Rule 4 demanding that I get my sub unlisted from /all, so I asked Magnora to remove my sub from /all because I only log into Saidit in my spare time and hence I really don't have the time for an extended debate about "what my rules actually mean", it should be pretty obvious that they are not meant to censor discussion but rather to stop harassment of individual LGBT people that might want to post on my sub. When I designed the rules, I wanted to let people who for example have been censored on /r/ContraPoints on Reddit know that they can cross-post whatever got them censored there on my sub instead so we can keep an archive of posts that get censored by Bardfinn & Co. But instead of asking me what I had in mind with the sub, this person pointed the finger at me accusing me, so instead of engaging this troll, I did what what took the least effort on my part, asked to be removed from /all if only to prevent future bitching of this kind. I still do not believe my rules violate Rule 4. I just don't have the time to sit there defending myself against baseless accusations, so I took the plea bargain.

            [–]Not4nothing 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

            Why are some subs not in the default for people not logged in? Im not referring to specialty subs such as IP, or GC but just regular subs that don't have any "offensive" content or language.