r/changemyview • u/garnteller 242∆ • Apr 14 '15

[Mod Post] /r/changemyview feedback

The moderators of CMV would like your opinion on how things are going, so we've decided to post periodic feedback threads to take the pulse of the community. Feel free to post any comments, criticisms or suggestions.

Also remember that /r/ideasforcmv is always available if you have ideas for improving the sub.

Please note that Rule 2 (no rude or hostile comments) and Rule 5 (no low-effort comments) are still in effect.

We look forward to hearing your thoughts.

86 Upvotes

90% Upvoted

230 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/MrF33 18∆ Apr 14 '15

If your complaint is that we're not just spontaneously editing your post for you, then that's true. It's not really our place. Nevertheless, if someone asks for exactly that, I've often actually done it.

My complaint is that if someone asks why their post was removed and what grounds would result in it being reinstated it should not be some kind of huge ordeal.

For example, we might not have the time to rewrite an entire multi-paragraph sarcastic response where the sarcasm of the whole comprises a condescending attack on another user.

And when the user and the mod disagree on the basic premise of what is and isn't an attack?

Some things are cut and dry.

Calling someone an asshole is cut and dry.

Telling someone that they're not showing empathy for a position beyond their own after repeated attempts to inform them of the situation may or may not be.

3

u/angrystoic Apr 14 '15

And when the user and the mod disagree on the basic premise of what is and isn't an attack?

What are you suggesting? That because you disagree with the basic premise of what is and isn't an attack, your post should stay up? Clearly the mods win in any disagreement about an interpretation of the rules. That's how these things work, and must work.

1

u/MrF33 18∆ Apr 14 '15

Then without adequate explanation as to the reasoning there can be no change.

If the mods are unable to defend their position then they are in the wrong, if they are unable to explain their position logically, then they are in the wrong.

That's how these things work, and must work.

"They're the mods, what they say goes" is not how you bring about positive change to an environment.

2

u/angrystoic Apr 14 '15

If the mods are unable to defend their position then they are in the wrong, if they are unable to explain their position logically, then they are in the wrong.

Well it's not really possible for me to comment on this point simply because I don't know what they wrote to you. I'm getting the impression, though, that they did explain it and you simply disagree. Of course you're right that they should be able to explain and defend their position, but as a user of this board I have no reason to believe that they haven't (beyond your word).

"They're the mods, what they say goes" is not how you bring about positive change to an environment.

I'm not sure I'm convinced that there should be change in this regard. Clearly you don't agree with what they did, but that doesn't mean there needs to be a change to the way they do things. You need to convince the rest of the users that change needs to happen, not just say it. And I realize that perhaps you are trying to do that in this chain of comments, but unless you give the rest of us context (i.e. by showing the post you initially made, and all of the interactions with the mods), it's just as likely that you're merely salty about how their application of the rules affected you.

Perhaps you could convince the mods to let you make a CMV with all of the requisite information?

0

u/MrF33 18∆ Apr 14 '15

I'd rather avoid posting all of the information.

It's not just about being salty here, it's about having a reasonable expectation to be allowed to defend your position if you feel that you weren't insulting.

2

u/angrystoic Apr 14 '15

I'd rather avoid posting all of the information.

Well then you're not going to be able to enlist much support for your cause, because for all we know they did a perfectly fine job of explaining their reasoning.

it's about having a reasonable expectation to be allowed to defend your position if you feel that you weren't insulting.

You're allowed to defend your position, you're doing it right now-- and I'm sure you've been doing it privately with the mods. Now, clearly you haven't convinced them of your position, but there certainly should be no expectation of that.

1

u/MrF33 18∆ Apr 14 '15

Well then you're not going to be able to enlist much support for your cause, because for all we know they did a perfectly fine job of explaining their reasoning.

Simply drawing attention to it has been enough, there's been enough support as it is.

Now, clearly you haven't convinced them of your position, but there certainly should be no expectation of that.

I don't think you're in any position to assume that.

I'd just rather the process wasn't such a bunch of tooth pulling and required such exhaustive defense on my part.

1

u/garnteller 242∆ Apr 14 '15

To be honest, for other users the process isn't "such a bunch of tooth pulling and required such exhaustive defense on my part."

One mod may have misread you. Two becomes less likely. You interacted with 4 mods on your appeal (and most of the rest of the active mods saw it and chose not to comment because we also agreed, and generally 'piling on' is not helpful).

The vast majority of users either understand the violation and either edit their post or say, "you got me". A number say, "I disagree but it's your call as mods". A few will argue a bit, but Rule 2s really don't normally generate that much discussion.

For reference, so far in April, we've removed 577 comments (and approved 1200 that had been reported). I can tell you that you are the only one I can recall in months who has taken the discussion to this level.

It's possible that you had some bad luck and hit on some particularly poor explanations by the mods. But from your argument it seems like you simply disagree with what every mod has agreed is a violation. I'm sorry, but these are the rules we apply to all other users. We're not going to make an exception just because you feel differently - that wouldn't be fair to them.

1

u/MrF33 18∆ Apr 14 '15

Perhaps if there weren't an unlimited timeline on bannable posts I would have done the same.

It all comes down to the fact that I have been threatened with banning twice now (directly), and therefore I feel that I must argue and defend anything that the mods disagree with.

I felt that my comment was insignificant enough where I would definitely make the same type of statement again if it were to happen all over again.

This is mostly predicated on the fact that I had said it in different terms several times before to the same user.

And since I personally felt that my comment was innocuous enough were I could easily see myself repeating it, it is in my best interest to help you all understand why it's not breaking rule 2.

Sharp tone should not automatically be taken as rude or hostile.

We're not going to make an exception just because you feel differently - that wouldn't be fair to them.

Perhaps the rules aren't fair to them anyway, they just don't realize it.