Arguments against auto-subscribing all new users to all subs
submitted 5 years ago * by Stoner from (self.SaidIt)
view the rest of the comments →
[–]cmdrrockawesome 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - 5 years ago (8 children)
I was wondering about this too. There are a number of subs that have 5000+ subscribers (practically the entire user base) that just boggle my mind.Things like s/conspiracyundone, s/The_Donald, s/LateStageCapitalism all have over 5000 subs. s/antipsychiatry has almost 5000 subs. Auto subscribing people to every sub certainly makes the user base here seem to lean in a certain direction.
[–]Stoner[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - 5 years ago (7 children)
Good points. IMO the best way to go about this is to reset all subscriptions. It's the only way to truly reflect saidits community and be fair towards newly created subs.
The sooner the better before /s/ gets a ton of users and subcreators to complain about the reset.
/u/d3rr /u/magnora7
[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 5 years ago* (3 children)
What is your proposal? Turn off the auto subscribe feature and change everyone's subscriptions to the default subs?
On our roadmap right now is new configuration that will let you switch back to the default Reddit experience- set subscribed as the home page, unsubscribe from all subs.
[–]Stoner[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - 5 years ago (2 children)
Turn off the auto subscribe feature and change everyone's subscriptions to the default subs?
Either that or make all current users subscribed to all subs again and let us re-unsubcribe as usual. If I understand it correctly, currently we only subscribe to the subs at the account creation, not new ones as they're created. The goal is to make the subscriber count reflect the community, now it's more of a list of the oldest or not-annoying-enough-to-unsubscribe subs and it will take a long time before it balances out and reflects the community's active preferences, if ever.
An example would be /s/Archeology. It's currently inactive (1 post last 3 monts), yet it's one of the top 3 subs and will continue to be so until you change the mechanics of auto-subscribe and current subscrictions OR somebody starts shitposting to the point where people unsub en masse.
[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - 5 years ago (1 child)
Thank you for clarifying and for your input on these critical issues.
Either that or make all current users subscribed to all subs again and let us re-unsubcribe as usual.
For now, this is the plan. There will be a new checkbox for this that is checked by default, "subscribe to newly created subs".
[–]Stoner[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - 5 years ago (0 children)
There will be a new checkbox for this that is checked by default, "subscribe to newly created subs".
Works for me! Thank you for your replies.
[–]magnora7 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 5 years ago (2 children)
It's just an artifact that the oldest subs have the most subscribers, that's all it is. We have no plans to change people's existing subscriptions, but we might make new users not be subscribed to everything.
[–]Stoner[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - 5 years ago* (1 child)
EDIT: D3rr have offered a possible technical solution I'm very happy about. Thank you for your time.
It's just an artifact
No doubt, but not doing anything will:
An example would be /s/Archeology. It's currently inactive (1 post last 3 monts), yet it's one of the top 3 subs and will continue to be so until you change the mechanics of auto-subscribe and current subscrictions OR somebody starts shitposting to the point where people unsub en masse. might make new users not be subscribed to everything.
might make new users not be subscribed to everything.
considerthefollowing.jpg:
If you stop auto-subscribing for new users, there will a 5270 subscriber difference between a new sub and the oldest, inactive sub. I believe a common way new users from reddit-like site finds new subs is to sort by subscriber count and pick as you go down until you reach a personal threshold size.
This is unfortunate in two ways, it stifles the growth of small subs and users who subscribe (or alternatively 'don't unsub from') /r/Archeology will find a ghost town with 5000+ inhabitants.
We have no plans to change people's existing subscriptions
If it's possible from database info, how about autosubscribe all users to subs created after account creation and keep auto-subscribe then? It won't have to change the current system, yet will reflect the actual community posting grounds?
[–]magnora7 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 5 years ago (0 children)
If it's possible from database info, how about autosubscribe all users to subs created after account creation and keep auto-subscribe then?
This is a feature we plan on developing, it's in the pipeline. So I guess we're in agreement now :)
use the following search parameters to narrow your results:
e.g. sub:pics site:imgur.com dog
sub:pics site:imgur.com dog
advanced search: by author, sub...
~2 users here now
This is Saidit's main sub for things related to the saidit.net website itself.
If you need help with using this website or related tools, post in /s/help. If you want a place to post any topic to the community, try /s/whatever or /s/asksaidit. If you want to create a wiki page, use /s/wiki.
view the rest of the comments →
[–]cmdrrockawesome 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - (8 children)
[–]Stoner[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - (7 children)
[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (3 children)
[–]Stoner[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - (2 children)
[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - (1 child)
[–]Stoner[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - (0 children)
[–]magnora7 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (2 children)
[–]Stoner[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - (1 child)
[–]magnora7 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (0 children)