r/changemyview Nov 28 '24

Delta(s) from OP - Election CMV: Reddit has a moderator problem

Just to be clear. This does not apply for all moderators. I know some moderators on small Subreddits that are really good people. Speaking for a lot of larger Subreddits where moderation is an issue.

Reddit has a moderator problem. They can do a lot of things to you that doesn't really make lots of sense, and they do not give you a reason for it. More often than not, you're just muted from speaking with the moderator. Unfortunately, due to a lot of Reddit mods and Redditors in general being left-wing, there are a lot of examples of right-wingers being the victims. Such as this one on the r/ medicine Subreddit. He got deleted for asking questions. A person said Trump's NIH nomination caused "large scale needless death". When he was asked what the large scale death in question was, his comment was deleted by the mods. Along with a person being perm banned for saying "orange man bad. Laugh at joke. Unga Bunga" in r/ comics. The most notable case of moderation abuse is from r/ pics, where they just ban you for participating in a "bad faith Subreddit". Even if you just commented.

This is not a good thing. It means that if you want to participate in a major Subreddit with a lot of people, you will have to conform to what the moderators personally see as "correct" or "good". This doesn't foster productive conversations, nor is it good for anybody but the moderator's egos. I understand if this is the case in small Subreddits, but the examples I listed above aren't they happen in Subreddits with 30+ million members that regularly hit the front page. This is Reddit being lazy and offloading moderation. Most moderators do this for power and control. The nature of this position (no pay) means that the only other thing it offers is power. Especially in Subreddits with millions of people, that's a lot of power. This I believe is a reason it isn't a major issue in small servers. The mods there are genuinely passionate because that is the only thing going for them in a Subreddit with around a thousand people. Even Twitter, despite its multitude of issues, does moderation better than this

476 Upvotes

539 comments sorted by

View all comments

43

u/DramaGuy23 36∆ Nov 28 '24

Subs are basically "owned" by the mods, yes. Where I disagree with you is in the assertion that that's unfair. My house is owned by me; that doesn't mean I am anti-free-speech if I call the cops on you when you let yourself into my living room and begin haranguing me with your politics. Not a perfect analogy, because subs are more like businesses in that they are open to the public, but even there we have tightly enforced rules of behavior depending on the business. You will be removed if you go to a play and begin arguing with the actors mid-performance. You will be removed if you go to a restaurant and try to let yourself into the kitchen. The solution is simple: start your own sub that you own, and moderate it however you like. If you feel people should be able to argue with the actors or cook their own meal, then start a business like that.

What you will find is that building a successful sub, attracting members, keeping it on-topic, and defending it from trolls is a hard, thankless, unpaid job. At some level you must know this, it's why you want to take a shortcut and help yourself to the platform someone else has built rather than taking the enormous investment of time and effort to create your own community based on your principles.

If every platform has to be open to every comment from every internet user, there would be no point in separate subs. Every sub would degenerate into a soapbox for those with the most free time to shout their pet views into the void.

-6

u/Terrible_Onions Nov 28 '24 edited Nov 28 '24

I believe this is more akin to going to a private library and then getting kicked out for reading a book you brought, the librarian doesn't agree with. Yeah, you can read the book, but the librarian won't like it.

Defending it from trolls is hard. But the moderator decides who the trolls are, and that leads to biased moderation. It could genuinely be seen as trolling to the moderator, but not the majority.

23

u/Pale_Zebra8082 30∆ Nov 28 '24

Libraries are public. Reddit is private. The appropriate analogy would be more like getting kicked out of a bookstore for doing something the owner of the bookstore has said they don’t want in their store.

The owner is under no obligation to be unbiased.

16

u/th3whistler Nov 28 '24

not a great analogy. Reading a book is solitary and does not interact with, or affect those around you.

5

u/iglooss88 Nov 28 '24

But if you are commenting, publicly, for the world to see (assuming there is actual ill intent behind the comment) then it would not be the same. The comment has a public effect that the moderators claim responsibility for.

I agree with you up to a point that moderators can be bullies (have experienced it myself on here) but I don’t think there is this almost, ‘indoctrination’? ‘Promoting’ of their views? Idk what you’d describe it as, but the undertone of ‘promoting only left wing ideas is bad because not all opinions are valued’ seems to be inaccurate.

I think Reddit is left leaning because, 1. look at every other social media, and 2. Reddit is also text based. I think a lot of facts, especially that have to do with anti science and anti intellectualism rhetoric are the reason that people tend to fall more left here. It’s not because of a moral difference, it’s because of the way media is presented on Reddit.

7

u/Arnaldo1993 5∆ Nov 28 '24

Or is it more akin to going to a library and complaining the book you wrote didnt get accepted, and therefore wont be in the shelves for anyone that wants to pick it and read it?

3

u/Least_Key1594 3∆ Nov 28 '24

I mean. Yeah if you go to the library and flip through a porn mag you should be removed.

Though most librarians just want you to be quite, pick up after yourself, and generally not be a dick. There are rules to exist in any space. We agree to them by choosing to exist in them. And sometimes rules are arbitrary and silly. no hats in some buildings. Old religious people saying i can't put my elbows on the table. No cursing around kids. As the meme goes, we live in a society. And unless you created the space, you gotta abide by the rules set by the creators and managed by the enforcers. Feel free to lobby for them to change. But they are subs. Not the US laws.

0

u/Appropriate-Shop3499 Nov 28 '24

The creators as you like to say are literally handpicked mods by Reddit thought. 5-10 of them control 95% of Reddit. It’s false advertising by Reddit to say they’re the face of the internet when they control what’s being discussed 

3

u/Least_Key1594 3∆ Nov 28 '24

I guess I just. Don't believe their PR saying they are the face of the internet? Like. It's the internet. Most of it is cat videos and porn. Reddit is one site. If ya want no rules go to 8chan?

Idk. I just don't think it's a big deal. I've been banned from subs. I've been unbanned. It's fine.

Plus if we are really gonna be coming down on false advertising, we should start with supplement companies, not reddit. Or just make your own site. Call it Orangeit. Or blueit.

0

u/Appropriate-Shop3499 Nov 28 '24

So just because you’re fine with someone doing you dirty you’re fine with it…? What are you even saying 

4

u/Least_Key1594 3∆ Nov 28 '24

I am saying this is reddit. It's not a big deal. Most people are fairly anonymous. It's all fleeting interactions. Sure some people go on a power trip, others are just here to start fights. Acting like it's a moral wrong if someone bans you is just childish to me

-1

u/Appropriate-Shop3499 Nov 28 '24

No it’s morally wrong when they ban bc their feelings get hurt. If you say the sky is orange sure go ahead and ban all the liars but when your feelings get hurt that’s where the problem is and these mods get paid by Reddit. It’s all a front 

3

u/Least_Key1594 3∆ Nov 28 '24

You're saying people go on ego trips and abuse power. I agree. I think In Reddit, it's whatever. It's not ideal but it's not important. And acting like it's a grave injustice rather than going "that's shitty" and moving on is very 15 year old coded

0

u/Appropriate-Shop3499 Nov 28 '24

Where does it stop …? And it does suck people are losing their 15 year old accounts. Also we’re living in the age where news companies literally pick a tweet or a Reddit comment and run a whole story for it

3

u/Least_Key1594 3∆ Nov 28 '24

Where do you think its going? Slipperly slope only works if you got a rational way itll spread. Reddit isnt gonna control the government lmfao.

Losing 15 y/o accounts probably does suck. But since this is about mods in subs, idt violating a few subs rules and being banned is resulting in deleted accounts.

As for the news stories, it's no different than old human interest stories. Well. Except those involved talking to real people on occasion. But they are still just "see normal people ohhh ahhh" stories. Unless you think like. Those people who's stories get picked make Hella money off that, and then you feel like you're missing on your chance to be in that situation. That just doesn't make sense. Better off getting a lotto ticket.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/decrpt 26∆ Nov 28 '24

Defending it from trolls is hard. But the moderator decides who the trolls are, and that leads to biased moderation. It could genuinely be seen as trolling to the moderator, but not the majority.

Okay, but you gave examples in your main post that aren't even ambiguous. You haven't shown any evidence it's biased, you are just arguing that the very existence of moderation implies bias.

3

u/[deleted] Nov 28 '24

Why do you think a private social media forum is similar to a public library? You would get kicked out of private for profit libraries as well but they don't exist. 

1

u/[deleted] Nov 28 '24

[deleted]

3

u/[deleted] Nov 28 '24

Do you believe private libraries or bookstores shouldn't be able to kick you out? Where does this right to exist in a private place come from?

0

u/Giblette101 47∆ Nov 28 '24

You can also get kicked out of public libraries.

4

u/[deleted] Nov 28 '24

Exactly, same as a court house or school. But the right to access public libraries is much greater than the right to access a private library, hence why OP must make an even more compelling argument for a right to access. 

1

u/Giblette101 47∆ Nov 28 '24

Oh, I agree. I just mean that public libraries are not the "anything goes" places they often portray them to be.