2 ms·
i see your point, but it also brings about something like where certain people see quality degrading, and go off to make their own subreddit/community like /r/t
by volkk 7y ago
i see your point, but it also brings about something like where certain people see quality degrading, and go off to make their own subreddit/community like /r/truereddit or /r/truetruereddit, etc.
it's an interesting phenomenon and am curious as to whether its better this way, or actually making things worse.
- TheCapn 7y agoI think if things worked purely that way and everything was completely transparent it would be fine but there's a few things that muddy the waters 1) Moderators create alternate accounts and gobble up offshoots. They'll either have multiple mod accounts so they can "step down" and pass power to themselves when opinion rallies against them or they straight up seed themselves throughout reddit as moderators to dozens of communities 2) How do you spread the word when moderators have final word on what's posted in the "main" subreddit? Say there's an uprising in some obscure fandom and fans want a new place to correlate outside of the moderator's rule; how do they spread the word to the community efficiently that they exist when there's only one main hub for that fandom currently and the moderators silence anything (often with the AutoMod) that reference the new community? --- I think public moderation in general is good. But the tools for the community to branch out are often lacking and when moderator power-tripping crosses a line there's no outlet for members to reach Admins who will objectively weigh the facts and act on complaints.