you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Fine with me, I donno what's best. This is the old "changing topics with sub rules" discussion from the mod rules launch.

[–]magnora7 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Here's the mod rule I just added. I changed 4 to 4a, and then added 4b:

4a) Mods cannot remove user comments that are both in good faith and on-topic.

4b) Mods CAN remove opposing opinions that are high on the pyramid of debate, and ban those users on that sub, if and only if the 2 following conditions are met: 1: The fact the sub removes opposing opinions is announced in the sub's sidebar. 2: The mods uncheck the sub setting "allow this sub to appear on /all"

What do you think?

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

I'm still on the fence about requiring hiding from /s/all. The rule reads clearly though.

[–]magnora7 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Alright, we can try it out and if it sucks we can change the part about /s/all, not a huge deal. I'm just trying to be consistent with what IP2 and incels have already done, more or less, just putting it in to writing.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah the inconsistency needed to be addressed for sure.