Comment pins are broke, so see below:
OK, here's the first second draft of the new rules. Everyone made thoughtful contributions - thank you.
- Do not advocate for illegal violence or post other illegal activity. (Be aware of your local laws.)
- Don't be a fag, a psycho, or anything else that breaches the community's standard of conversation. New users will be held to a higher standard.
- Do not post porn.
- NSFW content must be flaired NSFW.
- No vote manipulation. Do not break communities.win's features.
- No spam or reposts. Do not make more than 5 posts a day.
- Do not post falsehoods and hoaxes that are obvious to an uncontroversial degree.
Notes:
- R16 has to go. That much is obvious. Anyway, the mod team is already diverse by 4chan's standard, not reddit's.
- "illegal violence" might seem redundant, but there are a million cases of civil/legal advocacy of violence, such as supporting the invasion of Venezuela. On the other hand, advocating for assassination can understandably earn you a visit from the Secret Service.
- R2 has replaced the original R3 and is specifically tied to the "community standard" as a minor safeguard against mod abuse. As many have noted here, we need a general purpose "don't be a fag" rule.
- The spam rule has been expanded.
- R7 is to prevent low IQ posting. It has been slightly retooled to, again, add a minor safeguard against mods banning posts due to differences of political opinion.
- The original R7, the brigading rule, has been deleted. This community is too small to brigade even random Twitter posts, and if we get raided then the new R2 will cover it.
A notice at the top: we are now able to handle content violation reports regularly with six people on the mod team, so please make sure to use the report button where appropriate and one of us should get to it. It's a work in progress.
As far as the rules, this is our current list:
- Do not post Illegal Activity, or criminal manifestos.
- Do not engage in speech that promotes, advocates, glorifies, or endorses violence.
- Do not threaten, harass, defame, or bully users.
- Do not post involuntary Salacious Material.
- Do not post Porn
- NSFW content must be flaired NSFW.
- Do not post Facebook accounts or twitter accounts with less than 500 followers, and personal information.
- Do not intentionally deceive others by impersonating another.
- Do not solicit or engage in transactions that are federally regulated by the US govt.
- No vote manipulation. Do not break communities.win's features.
- Do not post spam.
- Do not post intentional falsehoods or hoaxes.
- No reposts
- Do not post more than 5 posts a day to this sub.
- Do not direct particularly egregious identity based slurs at users.
- Do not attack entire identity groups as inferior or conspiring.
What deletions, additions, and modifications do you have in mind?
Sadly, that will always be the case, though. But, yeah, as little room for bad interpretations as possible is a good goal.
Similar to now, we can have shortform and longform versions of the rules. I think "don't advocate violence" is a fine shortform rule, and then we can spell it out further in the full rules.
Personally, I view advocating as direct calls to harm others, but not gravedancing. I find the latter very distasteful, personally, but don't view it as violative of any rules.
I don't view "retard fucked around and found out" or something to that effect, as breaking any rules. While something like "do this to all retards" would be a call to violence.
True. It's complicated, but the very fact we've had these rules and they haven't been enforced regularly is a good sign. We can definitely keep iterating though, but I think something like it should be there. Like you said, for the especially egregious cases.
Any suggestions?
I think the guy who suggested changing rule 16 to "don't be a nigger" is onto something lol. More seriously it's something I've been thinking about and it's hard problem. Shadow suggested wording like "don't be excessively hostile or obnoxious" which I think is a good starting point. I'd have the concerns I mentioned above about the second rule on your list, but you have a good point about us not having that problem even under DOM. I think ultimately the mods acting in good faith is more important than the actual ruleset. No ruleset would have stopped DOM from making excuses for Bluestorm or his selective enforcement bullshit. The Reddit ruleset was only a secondary problem. I'm encouraged by what I see. I think we'll land in a good place regardless of how exactly the new ruleset comes out.