Apologies to anyone who was eagerly awaiting a June moderation report that never arrived. I ran out of time to prepare it, so I decided to combine June and July together into a single report.
The sub added about 250 subscribed users per month during June and July, and was visited by around 5,500 unique users per month over the same period. On average there were just over 3 new posts and 35 new comments per day.
As always, our moderation log is completely public and can be viewed via the links here. If you have any questions, comments, or suggestions regarding the moderation of this sub, please comment in this thread or send us a modmail.
At this time, there are two specific topics about which we welcome opinions and suggestions:
Using the sub to fact-check content hosted privately
In general, there is no problem with users linking to relevant information hosted outside the sub, even where the linked site is not an inherently reputable source. But several users have contacted me to suggest that we restrict or prohibit “homework request”-type posts (“please help me improve this thing I wrote”, etc.), especially when the linked material is being monetized in some way (affiliate links, etc.).
Those concerns were obviously triggered by @tricky’s recent series of posts. It’s worth noting that those posts were all heavily upvoted, and the links undoubtedly contained information that is relevant to the sub. That said, some users seem uncomfortable about the sub being explicitly used for the purposes of fact-checking privately-hosted content.
The mods are very open to feedback on this topic, so if you have thoughts about it, please comment in this thread or send us a modmail. (It may be more productive to focus on the general issue of fact-checking/homework-requests and whether any new rules/clarifications are needed, rather than @tricky’s posts in particular.)
Promoting illegal behavior
As some users will know from previous discussions, I am generally averse to removing content that recommends or suggests actions that appear to be illegal. First, this is because I believe that subreddits like ours work best when bad ideas are able to be openly debated and incorrect assertions are able to be openly corrected. Second, it is because I believe that it’s impractical to expect mods to differentiate between what is legal and what is illegal. Basically, I trust that the community can successfully police itself (via comments, posts, and votes) with respect to the issue of what is legal and what is illegal.
That said, the sub is obliged to comply with reddit’s content policy, which does contain some limitations relating to legality (e.g., it prohibits the solicitation of transactions involving fraudulent services or falsified documents). And users have recently expressed concerns to me about the promotion of structuring in this thread from last week as well as the promotion of tax evasion in this thread from yesterday.
I’m going to be upfront about having no desire whatsoever to implement a blanket rule along the lines of “don’t recommend illegal things”. However, I’m curious whether anyone has any ideas regarding a more nuanced rule that would be capable of satisfying the users who don’t want to see illegal activities excessively promoted, without jeopardizing users’ freedom to openly debate bad ideas or correct incorrect assertions, and without putting an impractical decision-making burden on the mods. Comments in this thread and/or via modmail are most welcome.
Monthly Recap
The sub added about 250 subscribed users per month during June and July, and was visited by around 5,500 unique users per month over the same period. On average there were just over 3 new posts and 35 new comments per day.
Rule Enforcement Actions
- I removed 4 posts and 4 comments for being obvious spam.
- I removed 2 posts for consisting of merely a link to a video. We ask that users linking to videos provide an explanation of the content of the video and its relevance to the sub. The text content of the post should stand alone as a trigger for further discussion.
- I removed 2 comments under rule 1 for attacking other users with the term “beta bitch”.
- I banned 1 user for persistently posting spam comments after being asked to refrain.
- @idontknow-Toiro removed 1 comment for being spam.
- @djinadou removed 5 comments that were posted by bots, and banned all 5 bots (WikiSummarizerBot, StopRickRollBOT, answer-reddit-bot, Shakespeare-Bot, and FatFingerHelperBot).
Other Actions
- @idontknow-Toiro flaired 15 users, edited 7 flair templates, and made 29 wiki edits.
- I updated the flair on 10 posts, flaired 4 users, edited 9 flair templates, and made 4 wiki edits.
Top Posts & Contributors
- The most upvoted post during June/July was @tricky’s link to their furusato nozei guide. @tricky will be offered an "OP of the Month" flair to wear until the next monthly moderation report.
- The most commented-on post during June/July was @jen256-n’s post about investment options for US citizens. @jen256-n will have the chance to wear the “Premium Discussion Facilitator” flair.
Sub News
As always, our moderation log is completely public and can be viewed via the links here. If you have any questions, comments, or suggestions regarding the moderation of this sub, please comment in this thread or send us a modmail.
At this time, there are two specific topics about which we welcome opinions and suggestions:
Using the sub to fact-check content hosted privately
In general, there is no problem with users linking to relevant information hosted outside the sub, even where the linked site is not an inherently reputable source. But several users have contacted me to suggest that we restrict or prohibit “homework request”-type posts (“please help me improve this thing I wrote”, etc.), especially when the linked material is being monetized in some way (affiliate links, etc.).
Those concerns were obviously triggered by @tricky’s recent series of posts. It’s worth noting that those posts were all heavily upvoted, and the links undoubtedly contained information that is relevant to the sub. That said, some users seem uncomfortable about the sub being explicitly used for the purposes of fact-checking privately-hosted content.
The mods are very open to feedback on this topic, so if you have thoughts about it, please comment in this thread or send us a modmail. (It may be more productive to focus on the general issue of fact-checking/homework-requests and whether any new rules/clarifications are needed, rather than @tricky’s posts in particular.)
Promoting illegal behavior
As some users will know from previous discussions, I am generally averse to removing content that recommends or suggests actions that appear to be illegal. First, this is because I believe that subreddits like ours work best when bad ideas are able to be openly debated and incorrect assertions are able to be openly corrected. Second, it is because I believe that it’s impractical to expect mods to differentiate between what is legal and what is illegal. Basically, I trust that the community can successfully police itself (via comments, posts, and votes) with respect to the issue of what is legal and what is illegal.
That said, the sub is obliged to comply with reddit’s content policy, which does contain some limitations relating to legality (e.g., it prohibits the solicitation of transactions involving fraudulent services or falsified documents). And users have recently expressed concerns to me about the promotion of structuring in this thread from last week as well as the promotion of tax evasion in this thread from yesterday.
I’m going to be upfront about having no desire whatsoever to implement a blanket rule along the lines of “don’t recommend illegal things”. However, I’m curious whether anyone has any ideas regarding a more nuanced rule that would be capable of satisfying the users who don’t want to see illegal activities excessively promoted, without jeopardizing users’ freedom to openly debate bad ideas or correct incorrect assertions, and without putting an impractical decision-making burden on the mods. Comments in this thread and/or via modmail are most welcome.
