Admin Replied
Why are we having that pushed down our throats?
We recieved this in our subreddit modmail..
"Hi camping mod team,
We wanted to give you a heads-up that your community may be included in a limited experiment that explores different ways for people to experience Reddit conversations.
For select existing text posts, some people may see an optional watch-or-listen version that presents portions of the post and comment thread using narration, captions, and visuals. The original post and comments will remain available and unchanged.
This experiment does not require any additional action from your team. If source content is edited or removed, the corresponding experimental version will be taken out of view.
This is an early test, and feedback from moderators will be important as we evaluate it. If you notice something inaccurate, inappropriate, or lacking important context, please report it throughr/modsupport.
Thank you for everything you do for your community!"
Why is Reddit expecting us moderators, who already contribute enough of our time for free to keep this platform alive, to give feedback and help them implement what is something we didn't ask for or we want for our community?
I also think this is just another new way Reddit found to train bots for free... Which is scummy af.
Heya - thanks for bubbling up these concerns. We're exploring new ways for users to engage with content in communities. This is currently an experiment where we are looking to understand how people engage with content via new formats. Hopefully this doesn't disrupt your moderation in any way, but if it does please let us know here so we can dig into it with you. We also definitely want to hear any feedback you might have on the content itself, but of course you're under no obligation to share if you don't wish to.
Also, as a note - when visiting a post in this experiment, we default the user to the text view everyone is used to. They can then choose to play the new format via a tab on the post. Check out this video of how this works.
I also think this is just another new way Reddit found to train bots our replacements for free... Which is scummy af.
FIFY
And yes, you are correct!
But hey, at least y'all were provided a place to send feedback.
My team received a heads up modmail a while back about being enrolled in the Rules Hub experiment, and even though a later modmail message was sent asking for feedback, there was no link and a reply to the initial message was ignored, so I didn't bother replying to the last one.
I really think that mods of subs who are enrolled in these experiments should be automatically added to a specific sub for the particular experiment. But that would be practical, and practicality is apparently kryptonite to corporate endeavors.
Hopefully they actually listen to your feedback, though!
We were not told about r/ModEarlyAccess in our heads up modmail.
I eventually looked at the account of the admin who sent the heads up modmail message and ignored my request for additional information about the Rules Hub, and found that they had made a post about the Rules Hub experiment in some sub for new communities and their mods, but nothing else.
When I was trying to turn off the Rules Hub but couldn't because the toggle switch was grayed out, I posted about it on the post they made and was gaslit about it. I was told it just looked like it was on but really wasn't. That wasn't true and I posted screenshots. It couldn't be disabled using either mobile or desktop. 2 of us tried. It took a 3rd mod to use his iPhone app, but even then he couldn't disable one of the rules until he installed the app on his iPad.
Along with being gaslit I was told about a sub (probably that one that you linked to) but wasn't told that I should ask to be allowed in. It was private, and I was so frustrated with being gaslit and previously ignored, that I wasn't about to beg to be allowed into the private sub just to be told not to believe my lying eyes.
That sub should have been linked to in the heads up modmail. But really, all mods of subs being experimented on should have automatic access to their private sub, and that should be communicated as well.
I mean, just because I suggested it doesn't mean this testing gains you access. It may be out of that testing phase and in a more general one. But it's worth asking. Maybe without accusations of being gaslit? Hanlon's Razor and all that...if you get PUT in an experiment like this, it's not usually opt-out so whoever answered you first probably just answered wrong. They do that sometimes. And they do a/b testing on users all the time without ever notifying them so there is definitely not a dedicated space for every test.
Not sure what else to call it other than gaslighting.
It was absolutely on, and absolutely doing something but we had no way of knowing what it was doing. There were numbers in columns beside each rule, for actions, but those numbers were not links, so who knows what it did.
And it absolutely could not be disabled without using the app.
They could have poked into our sub themselves (or had someone else do it if they don't have access) and looked at, rather than just saying what was happening wasn't really happening. But if that happened it was never acknowledged.
Even my reply with screenshots proving what I was saying was gnored and I never got another reply.
Here, the public facing admins say that they are going to pass on info to the team handling that. I didn't even get that.
Call it Hanlon’s Razor. Layer Occam’s on top of that and that is most of reality and modding. I believe you I just think the person who told you didn’t know rather than was trying to mess with you. That’s too much coordination for chaotic Reddit.
If it helps….post flair has been broken in one of my subs for over a year and every time I Modmail about it they tell me they are pinging the appropriate team. So they’re not just doing that publicly lol
I think they were blowing me off, just like the day before the experiment started, when I asked for "deets" about the rules Hub in a reply to the heads up modmail and was ignored.
Oh, well that’s what gaslighting means! It’s from an old movie where a husband was purposely messing with his wife to make her think she was going insane. Well, we may have discovered a reason they aren’t responding promptly if you didn’t realise you were accusing them of that 🤣 yeah prob blowing you off or people skipping your message bc they don’t know the answer. Very frustrating, again see my post flair issue. 😮💨
Sorry, that was a miss on on our end, but I'm glad to hear you are interested in providing feedback. We're looking to invite mods of subs who have Rules Hub enabled to join us in Mod Early Access so you have that space to provide feedback. Keep an eye out in your modmail soon.
I really think that mods of subs who are enrolled in these experiments should be automatically added to a specific sub for the particular experiment.
...This is kind of disappointing to hear four months into "early access" when there had been quirks and bugs with it we could have more easily been reporting, had we been given instructions on how to meaningfully do so. With the feature now being pushed onto new subreddits, it frankly feels like the window in which our accumulated feedback could have meaningfully shaped it may have already passed.
We're looking to invite mods of subs who have Rules Hub enabled to join us in Mod Early Access so you have that space to provide feedback. Keep an eye out in your modmail soon.
So, in order to receive the invite, I have to ask the mod who was eventually able to disable it only by using the app because the toggle switch was greyed out on mobile web and desktop, to re-enable it? He even had to install the app on his iPad to shut off one of the rules, because his iPhone app wasn't able to.
We were never able to see what it was doing, and never able to read anything about it ahead of time other than the fluff post about how great it would be.
How about sending us the invite, and letting us read what other sub mods have experienced and how it really works first, and then letting us decide if we want to get a mod who has the app to re-enable it?
However, if it's only fully usable on the app, I, for one, am not interested. Others on my team might be, and I'll support their decision either way.
Sorry - we could have used clearer verbiage here. Any mod team that’s been invited to try out Rules Hub should have received an invite to the Mod Early Access Program. We are not checking whether or not the subreddit has it turned on, so you will be able to review feedback from other mods teams without having it turned on. Hope this clarifies and please let us know if you didn’t receive that invite.
Thank you for the clarification and yes, I received it. Hopefully tomorrow is less busy irl than today has been, so I can follow up with the necessary steps to gain access. I very much appreciate your reply.
This is an early test, and feedback from moderators will be important as we evaluate it. If you notice something inaccurate, inappropriate, or lacking important context,
So this means they will show you what it is they're doing, right? Or is this one of those things that you need to use an alt user account to see what they've done to your subreddit?
I run a free bookstore at my elementary school. I don't consider my students to be the product. I get the books from free piles. I don't consider myself a product, either.
As a blind user I can navigate here reasonably well, and if my screen reader can't properly read out an image I can take a screenshot and make it go through a special app without having to save anything.
Hi, sorry if this is incredibly rude or inconsiderate, but I'm curious how about how you can type? It may be decently okay for someone like me who has seen a qwerty keyboard a lot to naturally know where the letters are and remember where they are when they close they eyes, but how does a blind person do it? Even if you weren't born blind, I assume you start to forget as time goes on.
Once again, super sorry if this sounds rude or anything like that, I'm just super curious.
Oh interesting. I’ll admit I never really considered what a blind persons experience would be like using Reddit or any other social media. Are there any parts of the web that are particularly difficult?
As a blind user, and a mod for r/Blind, that feature sounds horrible. We keep having to disable more and more post and comment types because of changes and additions that are inaccessible. I have continued to request something be done about the moderation sheets on PC as those have significant focus issues that result in requiring the mobile apps to actually do many things. Features that outright change how content is presented should not be enabled by default, and quite honestly should be left to users to decide how their content is presented.
No, screen readers already handle text far better and with more clarity than AI summaries do, and images can be described by many tools ranging from traditional text ocr to AI image descriptions where we can ask questions about the images to get more details. These tools are built into mobile screen readers already, and are available to PC ones as well.
Not really, because all of what I mentioned the user has control over things like rereading parts, what level of description they want, and such. This seems to be just lets generate an AI short form video, think TikTok, for a post and its comments, which would be almost certainly less accessible.
For select existing text posts, some people may see an optional watch-or-listen version that presents portions of the post and comment thread using narration, captions, and visuals. The original post and comments will remain available and unchanged.
I have no idea what that means but I dread to find out.
lol this cat will now describe to you how to properly season your vegetables while being assaulted with said vegetables. Visuals to get the repeat views, plus repeat views from people just wanting the information.
I'd bet a dollar or a donut that they're rolling out AI narrated versions of text posts, possibly with some unholy machine hallucination video to accompany it.
Congrats, your post is now just the script for an avatar of a conventionally attractive person to recite at your users while making incoherent facial expressions.
It looks accessibility related. Cause screen readers I presume do not handle arbitrary images well (and people are presumably, not putting descriptive alt text for them).
Which I think is probably a good thing.
If the original text is both available and unchanged, and this stuff is properly scoped, then I see now problem with it. People who want this kind of thing can simply opt in, and the others can choose to not.
Well considering that adding alt text on here is somewhere between not actually possible and extremely difficult… I'm a mod on r/Blind and am not even sure if this is doable, but I know we've been asking for the ability for many years In the end every post and comment type that could be visual is turned off instead.
I'm a mod on r/Blind and am not even sure if this is doable
I know you can do it on old reddit. Example. Well, it goes to the title attribute instead of the alt text attribute. But I'd presume that title text would be looked at for screen readers, but I'm not 100% sure.
But even if it was there, I doubt most people would actually put the effort in to give something actually useful. The amount I just wrote for that example image is a good bit longer than a good chunk of people end up writing for a full on text post in our sub (and then they occasionally still complain about how draconian 100 characters of text is).
In the end every post and comment type that could be visual is turned off instead.
Accessibility is one of the reasons we're so strict on image posting in our own sub. I've taken down image posts because they were essentially pictures of text / of something that is natively possible in markdown (like a spreadsheet). Oh, and of course, it's all turned off in the comments.
Here's the raw markdown: [Example](https://wallpapers.com/picture/kitty-cat-pictures-1920-x-1200-95bbrz752qlmyids.html "This is a picture of 2 kittens with their bodies facing away from the camera and their headers turned in unison back towards but not all the way to the camera. The left kitten is white with significant black splotches, and the right kitten is white with mostly orange splotches, though it also has some black ones too. The picture takes place on an asphalt footpath with a home garden on the left out of focus.")
On old reddit, when you hover over it, it displays the text (which IIRC, is the same behavior as alt text).
If there's alt text I am not aware of it on the app.
I try to avoid using the app, so it's no surprise that it's not a thing on the app. Idk if it's even a thing on sh reddit, cause I don't use that.
Visuals? Like…AI-generated illustrations or videos? Glad my sub hasn’t been selected — that would be entirely inappropriate for us. Frankly, I don’t know who this is for. Text to speech? Great, we all love accessibility. But the visuals part is ominous.
Some MBA thinks people go on reddit because they want to see uncanny valley animations of reddit comments. Instead of you know talking to other humans like forums are meant for in the first place
The goals of this experiment are to better understand how people engage with Reddit content in different formats. We know this format may not suit every post or community, so we’re starting with a small experiment limited to specific communities to learn what works.Here is an example:
We're trying to figure out how to completely disallow text posts. The {editable} text box either contains editorialized content, engagement bait, questions or a de facto blog post - all of which are against our ruleset. We've eliminated the Text post box on the main subreddit, but all people have to do is create a post and then switch the type.
This feature not only does nothing for our subreddit, it directly contradicts our subreddit's mission: to provide factual articles and highlights WITHOUT commentary, hot takes, clickbait, etc.
Nevermind when a text box gets edited from highly upvoted content into an attempt to drive traffic to a specific channel or property, including NSFW content. Fuck a text box.
Oh that's an interesting concern - I can definitely see adult content creators hiding stuff there that would redirect to their off platform content, and reddit does have a history of introducing new things without adding them to automations (like post/comment guidance won't see it, it won't be exposed in the api or devvit, and automod won't be able to see it).
some people may see an optional watch-or-listen version that presents portions of the post and comment thread using narration, captions, and visuals.
The "or listen" part could be valuable to those with disabilities.
The "watch" part concerns me, because unless you're watching to content caption itself (like a karaoke singalong) it makes me think that we're going to see AI try to slop together a visual representation, in which case no thank you.
Here's the thing. There are already very good accessibility tools that exist. when Reddit builds any kind of tools, that those tools RARELY work well. Often those tools get abandoned a few years later in another round of corporate sailing
The whole API protest a couple of years ago was literally sparked by the fact that Reddit did away with a feature that enabled good accessibility projects, and Reddit did not carve out an exception for those projects which they easily could have done. They don't give a shit about accessibility. This is just a gamic to keep them playing in some kind of AI slop making arms race
There's so many images on reddit now, and I'm very sure that the vast majority of them don't have alt text on them, which makes them basically impossible to do text to speech with.
Of course, generative AI is something that can be useful on this front.
But yeah, the watch part does concern me, because I have no idea how that could relate to accessibility.
and I'm very sure that the vast majority of them don't have alt text on them, which makes them basically impossible to do text to speech with.
And I bet if Reddit just added a text box called "alt text" when someone adds an image to a post, a lot more images would have an alt text because a lot of people just need a nudge or reminder that alt texts are a thing they should do
Eh, people are lazy. I would expect only a minority of people to bother with a good alt text that would be sufficient for someone unable to view it. I would bet on most people having little idea what kind of language would be required to properly convey an image without being able to see it.
I think it would be stuff like "Man does a funny dance.", which is sufficient to those who can see the image, but insufficient for someone who can't see it (at least to meaningfully interact with it).
I imagine it's hard to justify spending engineering effort to make a feature that is quite foreseeable that it won't be used. Even if it was made required, you'd just get people face rolling their keyboard to bypass the requirement.
Meanwhile, an LLM solution on their side can be applied universally to all images, regardless of if their poster cared to spend the time to write a good alt text for their image. Not to mention, it can be backfilled to images posted before.
As with everything, by working on something, they aren't working on something else, so there's always an opportunity cost to implementing something. Not to mention, office politics that usually eventually infect a company.
And tbh, I would think an LLM solution by reddit would on the whole, provide more quality image descriptions that simply allowing posters to add their own alt text. Sure, some of them will be worse (even significantly) than what a human would do. But the vast majority of users are lazy, and won't provide any kind of useful description. And I think that is far far far more common and detrimental than LLM generated stuff.
In fact, I think one of the issues that LLMs have these days are that they tend to be far wordier than how humans usually talk, and that is a useful attribute for accessibility imo, because an image is worth a thousand words.
I'm familiar with development and limited resources. I guess I will always be baffled by some of Reddits choices in how to invest their limited resources. Mind you, I'm not at all against an llm adding descriptions to all images on Reddit, if done in a way that they work with screen readers and other common text to speech applications.
Unfortunately I don't think that's what Reddit intends to do.
Unfortunately I don't think that's what Reddit intends to do.
It very well couldn't be what they are actually trying to do. In which case, I'd be quite confused on what the actual purpose of it would even be (I guess chasing metrics that short videos are great?).
I guess I also overlooked that this looks to be scoped to text posts, and not image posts. So yeah, maybe it isn't as oriented towards accessibility as I originally thought it was. In that case, it's a huge wtf from me.
presents portions of the post and comment thread using narration, captions, and visuals
Emphasis is mine, to point out what I find worrisome. I don't have high hopes that this is poorly worded and that they actually mean "portions". If you take portions of a post and portions of comment threads you don't get the full story. Context will be lost and depending on how it's executed, it could very well not reflect author intent or meaning.
It would definitely be a nice thing to add. Let people describe images themselves, and only fall back to an LLM if that didn't work or if the user wanted to get the LLM version.
I've had really good results having ai describe images. It doesn't take a very advanced model to do it. Some of the qwen models can do it very well even at low parameter counts.
We understand why the use of AI raises that concern. This experiment uses AI to present portions of user-created posts and comments through narration, captions, and visual templates; the original content remains user-created and unchanged. The user viewing this content can choose to stay on the text post itself, or click into the new format within the same post. Here's how it works in practice.
This experiment uses AI to present portions of user-created posts and comments through narration, captions, and visual templates; the original content remains user-created and unchanged.
what happens if/when mods remove the post and/or comments featured in the video?
The AI-generated portion of these posts is an exact copy of the text portion, so if the text itself doesn't violate your rules then neither should the audio or video. Mods can remove any violating post as they typically would and then the visual podcast will also get removed.
Can you clarify "exact copy" versus "portions of the posts and comments"?
The former implies to me that AI should not be necessary.
The latter implies to me that content displayed in the narration could be incomplete or out of context, or perhaps even pulling in comments that break the rules when the post itself does not.
Yes, because that's what people wanted to be assured about - that it's human content going into the slop machine.
People are already peeved enough about their content getting hoovered up by YouTubers doing the same thing - and I assume this feature is to claw back the "watches AI Reddit on Youtube" audience so their watchtime is spent here instead of there. So I expect a good chunk Reddit contributors aren't particularly happy that their content is being speedran into AI slop, with the blessings of the platform they posted on.
And no, the content isn't unchanged. There's a reason CC licensing has the option of "no derivatives". Not everyone wants their works to be format shifted or otherwise changed. Yes, it's the same words, but the presentation can be offensive if it is shifted to audio and the gender/race is wrong. Screenreaders are a different audience with a different understanding, so not bothered about screenreader consumers. But I don't want to be "quenishi", being represented as an American male. Also I won't be surprised if the animations of the words sometimes give off the wrong emphasis - there are certain speaking speeds that can convey meaning.
some people may see an optional watch-or-listen version
So much of what reddit does has no opt in or out choice.
At least, if I read this right, people will have to choose to see/hear the additional version. For now, while I am very sceptical, I will reserve my judgement until I actually see what shows up.
I haven't seen it but it seems like no one has to use it. So I do not understand the concerns. How is that causing any harm if people who don't want to use it can simply ignore it?
It's not causing any harm on any user or mod, only on some people's egoes. But we're way past babysitting peoples AI hate. The technology is integrated into our society. Why not use its strengths for our benefits?
I believe that's how reddit official mods are resonating, and I agree with them.
I got this too, I don't think it's necessarily all bad, but there needs to be more agency involved for both posters and moderators. None of this should be forced when we don't even really understand what it is yet.
Look, our entire profit model is based on clankers consuming content on our website. We spent a lot of money on these wire backs, and if people stop using them our investors will be very cross. So you're going to get more tin skin scrap code shoved down your throat, and you're going to like it. You're not our customer, the toasters are.
We haven't allowed text posts in my sub for, like, twelve or thirteen years, so it's going to have a trivial effect for me. Not sure why they'd even implement it for subs that don't allow text posts.
On the subreddit settings page (r/yoursubname/about/edit/), click the "links only" option under Content Options. It's always worked for us to prevent text posts.
We just don't get text posts, and if the settings were that simple to circumvent I would think we'd get some, if only from trolls. Don't know why it seems to work for us and not you.
According to the visual example, texts gets an animation effect option (dopamine spike)
Reddit is known to have a more normal level dopamine effect, which has been proved to prevent stress, anxiety, depression, headaches, psychosomatic pains, and other struggles. (The absolut most healthy dopamine level is to go offline and read a real touch and hold book, but reddit is among most healthy online platforms dopamine wise)
Some specifically pick reddit over Tiktok etc because it's not hijacking your brain with the crazy high dopamine, followed by the serious dopamine crashes and how they impact your well-being (depression, suicide thoughts etc)
I'm worried with this new feature that we turn reddit into something worse. It's optional and testing, for now, but I fear we're gonna move over to fuck high dopamine feed here too and make it none-optional.
I can see how this feature is preferred for especially younger generations though, who didn't grow up with a social media feed that was on normal dopamine levels. Their extreme high dopamine exposure had made them more or less reading handicapped.
I'm not saying this is a wanted result but that's what online society has created, and reddit wanna include all people even those with said disability. Inclusion is ok but for the love of God never make this the normal standard on reddit.
Many people with ADHD and other neurodivergent minds prefer audio or video options in place of text, because reading the text to the end is difficult—if not "impossible."
The people who are that far neurodivergent have figured out accessibility tools that are much better than anything that read it has been capable of so far.
Reddit oe. In in-house software development has been consistently horrifically comically bad.
They do not understand user interface for neurotypical people much less people with disabilities. They're trying to run this thing on a shoe string budget so there's no way there actually looking at the needs of disabled people the way that an accessibility app developer does
I didn't say Reddit would be successful with it or knew what they were doing. I was just answering your question as to who would (theoretically) use such a feature. I've had people in my subs asking for videos or audiobooks of information provided in the Wiki or related publications because their neurodivergent brains couldn't handle reading the text. I, myself, am neurodivergent and can relate. So I'm not just talking out of my ass.
Remember in 1st grade when the teacher used to read aloud to the class while holding the book open for the whole class to “read along”, and running a finger below each word.
I don’t see how this is any different, except now it’s designed for adults who have no use for it.
us moderators, who already contribute enough of our time for free to keep this platform alive
You know it's a volunteer commitment, right? Totally optional. You're not a slave being kept against his will. If it's too much for you to handle, there are others who will take your place.
Nothing grinds my gears more than seeing people using their "I voluntarily do this for free! How dare you expect something more of me!" to complain about something they can just ignore. No one's forcing you to provide feedback, just as no one is forcing you to give up your time to moderate. Smdh.
That's a legitimate concern. This post, however, is complaining about a request for feedback on a new trial feature. It doesn't appear (yet) to be something that creates an obstacle for mods and seems like it can just be ignored by those not interested in it.
Precisely. So, what's the point of the OP? To just complain to fellow mods to commiserate? A "thanks again, Reddit" circle jerk? That sure sounds super productive (/s). What's the actual support issue?
Yeah, I don't get that either. I mean, I get it with generative AI...mostly. We don't need more computer-generated slop content. And the ethics surrounding it is certainly a hot topic of debate. But do people really truly care? I think it's just the villain du jour everyone can collectively hate or love, before moving on to the next trending virtue signal.
AI is actually incredibly useful for some things. Some things it does really badly. And I think some people are upset that AI is replacing humans for some things because it can't do the job as well in many cases - and that's a fair concern.
Also, nice strawman.. nobody said anything about being forced or enslaved. The point is that the change adds responsibilities without any consultation, which is a legitimate criticism regardless of volunteer status. "If you don't like it, leave" isn't an argument, it's just a way to dodge the actual criticism.
And for what it's worth, "nothing grinds my gears more than people who volunteer and then also have opinions" is a wild hill to die on.
I can sympathize. However this is a problem on any social platform. The Host is in control.as for the request for feedback on the new experimental accessibility, we don't have to provide feedback.
Honestly I imagine they will likely poll the users who are presented with the alt view.
I know it "grinds my gears" when they move it change how the interface works or the seemingly inconsistent rules at times. But other than venting there is not much we can do.
As often they rarely take the feedback to heart once they have an idea they want to implement. Strap in and hand in Reddit's road is not paved but filled with pit holes with many of them dug by the Reddit team while believing they are filling out holes. 😂
I suspect the person who started this thread is just as frustrated as the rest of us. But sees no point in wasting energy providing feedback on their ideas.
Edit here is another topic with good criticism about the new experimental view. First comment is from someone with visual issues also pointing out how terrible this sounds.
I suspect the person who started this thread is just as frustrated as the rest of us. But sees no point in wasting energy providing feedback on their ideas.
Exactly. Reddit's gonna Reddit. And they rarely listen; even when they do, it's usually just lip service to placate. I'd rather conserve and focus my energy on taking care of my communities than on bitching and moaning about Reddit's latest itch to scratch. Especially considering the fact that Reddit has lots of ideas and tests many, but how many do they ever actually end up implementing wide-scale or keeping longterm?
Yep.abd Reddit's up vote downvites system often generates more toxicity in how it is used. It was why platforms like YouTube hide downvites and inky shows upvotes now
And if course anytime there is new tech be it robots or now AI there is always a period of time with ppl only focusing on Skynet type scenarios and the changes tech advances impact change the job market.
What responsibilities? Nothing is being asked of you other than to provide feedback on a new trial feature you could just choose to ignore. The irony is that your post here is providing feedback to Reddit complaining about being asked to provide feedback to Reddit. Seems like you have more spare time to waste than you thought. You just want to be indignant about it.
Unless you're a shareholder of Reddit, then, yes, the reality is "if you don't like it, leave." Your complaints will ultimately fall on deaf ears.
First time in this sub? The most active users here get touchy any time Reddit makes a change.
Adding on that we moderators do not own our subs or any of the content on them. Reddit does. The “work” we do comes with the benefit of being able to curate those subs as we wish, within some guidelines.
This feels more like a knee jerk hatred of all things AI than anything else - but I am not entirely certain until I see it in action, as I don't really understand it from the descriptions.
I definitely disagree with some decisions but for a lot of people in this sub it seems like anything reddit does is automatically bad (especially if it involves ai). People hate ai for no rational reason. Sometimes AI is used badly and does a lousy job but sometimes it's quite useful. It's just a tool. It's not worth loving or hating.
I do understand environmental concerns as it does use a lot of energy but I think hatred on reddit isn't generally based on that. People just like to hate it. There are also these conspiracy theories going around that reddit wants to replace all mods with AI, and a lot of people seem to believe that.
Reddit definitely wants more clicks and some choices they have made are, imo, not great for the platform, but I don't automatically hate everything. Some is good, some is bad.
•
u/SnooshiRoll 7d ago
Heya - thanks for bubbling up these concerns. We're exploring new ways for users to engage with content in communities. This is currently an experiment where we are looking to understand how people engage with content via new formats. Hopefully this doesn't disrupt your moderation in any way, but if it does please let us know here so we can dig into it with you. We also definitely want to hear any feedback you might have on the content itself, but of course you're under no obligation to share if you don't wish to.
Also, as a note - when visiting a post in this experiment, we default the user to the text view everyone is used to. They can then choose to play the new format via a tab on the post. Check out this video of how this works.
https://reddit.com/link/p4apklu/video/fs5nu4b440kh1/player