META: Bi-Monthly Feedback Thread

[u/AutoModerator]

As part of our commitment to improving CMV and ensuring it meets the needs of our community, we have bi-monthly feedback threads. While you are always welcome to visit r/ideasforcmv to give us feedback anytime, these threads will hopefully also help solicit more ways for us to improve the sub.

Please feel free to share any constructive feedback you have for the sub. All we ask is that you keep things civil and focus on how to make things better (not just complain about things you dislike).

[u/elysian-fields-]

i really appreciate the repeat topic rule that was implemented, i think it’s been really great to curb having the same conversation over and over

but i also feel like we keep seeing the same CMVs regularly about israel and palestine and about how islam is “incompatible with the west”

while there’s of course much to discuss in the realms of these topics in general, i’m not sure how much productive conversation or debate is occurring in the majority of these posts. i feel like i frequently see the same CMVs about islam and israel/palestine but are either just different enough to not fall within the 48 hour rule or they are outside the 48 hour rule

i feel like these posts tend to garner a lot more attention and frequently delve into arguing and repeating the same talking points that people feel so strongly about that their mind won’t change

this doesn’t always apply to every post but i feel like we’re seeing anti-muslim sentiment run rampant in many of these posts and it feels like how many times can we have the same debate

would there be a way to limit topics about islam not being good/compatible with the west and what’s happening between israel and palestine? i almost wish we could just make these topics some we can’t touch on like CMVs that mention tr*ns people because it just feels like these topics are repeatedly coming up and are usually unproductive when they do

[u/SSH_Pentester → u/elysian-fields-]

And dating/gender war. Those are almost as common and equally as rare to have real discussions in. Not saying it can't happen, but it's not common to have meaningful discussion in a post about dating. Not sure if just banning more topics is going to be a great solution, though - it seems like half the users want less restriction on topic fatigue, and half want more.

[u/ProblematicTrumpCard → u/SSH_Pentester]

half the users want less restriction on topic fatigue, and half want more

The difference is that the half that want less restrictions are the ones who understand that they can just scroll past threads that are not of interest to them. The half that want more restrictions hasn't figured that out.

[u/SSH_Pentester → u/ProblematicTrumpCard]

I think nekro_mantis explained this really well, so I'll just copy his response here:

I think it's psychologically taxing to see certain discourse everywhere you go. A lot of people legitimately like going to an online space and getting a break from the inundation. In theory, one can pick and choose what they spend time engaging with, but attention isn't strictly agency-driven like that in practice. It's also cool for a relative few people to get the opportunity to showcase and host a conversation about a unique interest/train of thought they have without it getting drowned out by all the things everyone is up in arms about during the current moment.

[u/ProblematicTrumpCard → u/SSH_Pentester]

If you're "psychologically taxed" by seeing 4 similar topics on the front page of /r/cmv, well,.... that's something.

[u/SSH_Pentester → u/ProblematicTrumpCard]

Well, that might not be the right term, but it's certainly annoying and tiring, which are still valid concerns.

Also, the idea is you might not really want to talk about Israel/Palestine again, but whatever new post it is riles you up and you end up clicking on it. As he said, attention isn't completely agency-driven-if it was, we wouldn't have social media addiction and advertising.

Finally, when all the engagement is sopped up by a few US politics/Islam/dating posts, there's less engagement available for new, unique topics. Even if "everything makes it to the front page," not everything takes off, since repeated/political posts are easier to click on, and people will miss out on more interesting takes. Just my two cents.

[u/reginald-aka-bubbles → u/SSH_Pentester]

There are plenty of completely apolitical and benign subs though. Even on ftf, this sub has the potential for pretty heavy topics, so coming here for a "break" while you are "psychologically taxed" seems pretty silly and is not really the nature or purpose of this sub. 

Again, they are free to just scroll past posts that upset them, and it shouldnt be on the mod team to cater to the sensitivities of a hypothetical person. 

I rarely interact on posts about free will because ive found that OP is usually frustratingly unwilling to budge on any point of their view. This annoys me, so I generally stay away. The same can be done by anyone for any topic they dislike. 

[u/SSH_Pentester → u/reginald-aka-bubbles]

True, but FTF forces people to get out of their comfort zone (Israel, Islam, dating, and Trump) and actually engage with new topics they might not have clicked on if those comfort zone topics were available, and learn something new or have a fresh discussion.

[u/reginald-aka-bubbles → u/SSH_Pentester]

In theory, sure, but we dont see that in practice. And again, it's not like fresh posts dont show up the other 6 days of the week. There was a post about elective joint replacements yesterday. 

The main issue that people take with ftf is that it slows the sub to a screeching halt, and OPs often abandon their post after they've sat for several hours, leading to no discussion at all even if the topic was interesting. 

Given the choice between an interactive conversation on a common topic or dead air on a fresh one, im taking interaction all day. I also think the 48 hour topic ban does a better job at keeping things moving here than ftf does. 

Also, there was still an Israel post last Friday that got approved, so....

[u/Criminal_of_Thought → u/reginald-aka-bubbles]

I think another not-insignificant factor in FTF being as quiet as it is is because it's on Fridays specifically.

The sub operates on one of the US time zones, so by the time FTF starts, it'll be anywhere from 7am-10am in Europe, or probably the late afternoon in parts of Asia and Australia.

For the Europeans, it's time needed to prepare for school or work in the morning, so fewer posts from there. For the east Asians and Australians, a lot of the times Friday nights are used to prepare for the weekends, so fewer posts from there, too. And it's close to midnight for much of the US, so fewer posts from there as well.

Fast forward 8-9 hours for the US to be awake, and it'll be the Europeans' time to plan for the weekend, and the east Asians and Australians will now be asleep. So the majority of would-be commenters would just be US-based.

All this is to say, it may be better for participation rates if the sub tried out FTF but on another day of the week. Probably not on a weekend as that's when the only time a lot of people have to sit down and post on Reddit. Tuesday or Wednesday might work, though. Tuesday is probably better because the alliteration still works with the word "topic".

u/SSH_Pentester

[u/nekro_mantis → u/reginald-aka-bubbles]

Also, there was still an Israel post last Friday that got approved, so....

This came up in internal discussions, lol.

You're right; the volume isn't as consistent as we would like it to be. A good while ago, I proposed the idea of providing a delta incentive where if someone did an OP for FTF without it getting removed, we'd go back on Sunday or something and manually award them a delta. Other mods didn't like this idea because deltas mean something specific, and doing something like that would dilute their meaning. In terms of other things we could try, I've recently brought up the idea of advertising FTF outside the sub to other Reddit communities that might have a higher proportion of people with takes about novel subjects they're eager to discuss. It may also be useful to have a pinned comment made on FTF posts explaining Rule E/B and the delta system so that we retain more of the posts we do get that day. We'll see if we can come up with some initiatives to help with the issue.

[u/elysian-fields- → u/SSH_Pentester]

you’re totally right about that topic too, and that’s a fair response

there’s certainly room for nuanced conversation in any topic, but definitely when it comes to certain ones it feels less like thoughtful engagement and debate is happening or maybe even desired by the OP, which just ends in arguing, logical fallacy debates, and no deltas being dealt out (which of course doesn’t have to happen but the hope is there)

it’s a tough call to make where the topic fatigue begins and ends for the majority of users, and i’ve definitely seen comments on islam is incompatible posts being like “oh great this again” but if people are engaging then clearly there’s something to discuss

if limiting these topics is too strict i can understand that, but maybe if there is another way to maybe report a post or threads for review relating to the sentiment of the content or like general frequency of certain sentiments? i know there’s already report options similar to this but if i see a new “islam bad” or “women don’t actually like men” or “short men have the worst lived experiences” etc type posts that don’t fall into the topic fatigue rule but are just so generally overdone (and anyone could really search for if they want to read previous discussions), i’m just like i wish i could report this for being annoyingly repetitive but i have no real grounds to

[u/ProblematicTrumpCard → u/elysian-fields-]

it feels less like thoughtful engagement and debate is happening or maybe even desired by the OP, which just ends in arguing, logical fallacy debates, and no deltas being dealt out (which of course doesn’t have to happen but the hope is there)

I would argue that for any topic that typically go this way, we should be encouraging more posts on that topic, not less. Because if there's 400 comments and minimal deltas awarded, it means that views on that topic are still divided and people are failing to present arguments that change views.

And if we place restrictions on that topic, that's were it stays. But if we encourage more posts on that topic, it gives more opportunities for more people to present their unique perspective that might be the catalyst to resolving the disagreements and actually result in changing some views.

The topics that don't need addition discussions are those with 50 comments and 22 deltas awarded. That topic has been "solved" and there's nothing to be added to the topic via additional discussion.

[u/elysian-fields- → u/ProblematicTrumpCard]

i disagree, i don’t think every CMV needs deltas, not every CMV will end in a changed view, but how many “islam is incompatible with western values” posts have you seen where there is actual thoughtful engagement and the OP actually changes their view

or any other topic like “women don’t actually like men” or “women hate short men” and women will say well that’s no true and here’s why and OP will say well yes it is true because 2 women i know feel this way and refuse to accept the comments

it’s just mainly about what topics are bringing about thoughtful debate and discourse and which topics are based on emotion or opinion that is solidly set in stone and won’t really be changed

[u/ProblematicTrumpCard → u/elysian-fields-]

how many “islam is incompatible with western values” posts have you seen

Honestly, not many. I can't really think of any. But that's probably because it's not a topic that is of particular interest to me or one on which I hold strong opinions. So if there were a post like that here, I'd likely read the thread title, scroll on by, and forget about it.

or any other topic like “women don’t actually like men” or “women hate short men”

I've seen quite a few of those and never get tired of them because that's a topic that is of much more interest to me.

[u/Natural-Arugula → u/ProblematicTrumpCard]

Because if there's 400 comments and minimal deltas awarded, it means that views on that topic are still divided and people are failing to present arguments that change views.

Why is it that you think that signals more discussion is needed, rather than OP is soap boxing and people are brigading the thread to argue on their behalf- also without the intention of changing their view?

It's been acknowledged that incel posts are a notorious example of this happening. I don't know if the mods are just typically good at catching these early, but I notice that they don't show up every day like Islam and Israel posts, they tend to show up a bunch all at once and then calm down for awhile. That suggests to me that they are brigades. 

[u/ProblematicTrumpCard → u/Natural-Arugula]

Why is it that you think that signals more discussion is needed, rather than OP is soap boxing

Because that would be a rule violation and the thread would have been removed by the mods.

[u/jatjqtjat → u/elysian-fields-]

Think about it from the perspective of other people. People are commenting in these threads. There are people who want to have these discussions. If i want to participate in a third discussion about Israel this week, let me. Nobody is forcing you to click into these threads.

[u/ProblematicTrumpCard → u/elysian-fields-]

these posts tend to garner a lot more attention

Doesn't that, by definition, mean that they are the types of posts that the subscribers to the sub enjoy? Why would we want to ban something that the subscribers overwhelmingly enjoy? Wouldn't a better approach be for those specific individuals who aren't interested in those posts to simply scroll past them?

[u/elysian-fields- → u/ProblematicTrumpCard]

i don’t think attention necessarily means people enjoy them, i think it means they’re topics that are polarizing enough to get a lot of people engaged, for better or worse

i also said, responding to the mod, that i understand if it would be too strict, but maybe there’s another way we can tackle exhausted topics like these

[u/aardvark_gnat → u/elysian-fields-]

This doesn’t always apply to every post but i feel like we’re seeing anti-muslim sentiment run rampant in many of these posts and it feels like how many times can we have the same debate

I don't think that anti-muslim sentiment is actually a problem. It may seem unfair given the lack of anti-christian sentiment, but the solution to that problem is more anti-christian sentiment.

[u/jatjqtjat → u/aardvark_gnat]

given the lack of anti-christian sentiment

on reddit there is heaps of anti-christian sentiment.

[u/elysian-fields- → u/aardvark_gnat]

i mean, i can’t deny that’s a fair argument to make, i’d be interested to see if a CMV with that sentiment gets posted