created by Georgy_K_Zhukov on 28/06/2020 at 13:00 UTC*
141 upvotes, 7 top-level comments (showing 7)
One of the hallmarks of /r/AskHistorians[1] is the high rate at which comments are removed, and subsequently, the 'seas of [removed]' that some popular threads turn into at times. For most regulars, this is something they don't only expect, but appreciate! But for newer users, and those who might not understand the underlying intentions of large scale removal, it can be confusing and frustrating, despite our best efforts to make clear what is going on with the stickied Automod comment.
1: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians
The most important thing to understand is that /r/AskHistorians[2] is a space created with a specific purpose, namely to provide a place where users can, quite literally, *Ask Historians* their questions, and complementary, provide a place where knowledgeable users want to contribute by writing answers to the questions in their spare time. Because *popular* doesn't equal *correct*, and because being *first* doesn't equal being *good*, the Moderation Team curates the subreddit to ensure that the only content left standing is the content that deserves to be.
2: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians
A joke can be written in seconds, and get 1000 upvotes in a few hours; likewise some muddled facts which are kind of right about some things can be posted nearly as fast to the same result. But a *good answer* can take hours of work, and if it is forced to compete with those low effort comments posted hour before, it will often languish unseen by most. That defeats the very heart of what the subreddit intends to be, and thus we remove comments which quality answers *shouldn't* have to compete against.
We won't dwell too much on what deserving means, as the previous Roundtables engage with that idea plenty, but the key point is that removal is a important part of ensuring that this subreddit lives up to what it is *intended* to be. In an ideal world, of course, no comments would be removed, but that is outside of our control, as it requires the *users* to demonstrate self-control and awareness, which we accept is impossible in an online space of our size, which long ago reached its Eternal September.
Some users, based on replies we get and META threads we see, are apparently convinced that the Mod team removes good answers. For what possible reason, I can't be sure, although we have been accused of political biases, as one might expect, but also more bizarre conspiracies such as gaining sexual satisfaction from removals. The simple fact of the matter is though that our rules are well publicized, and we expect users to read them before posting, and the only comments we are removing are the ones that break them! Nine times out of ten, they aren't even reasonable *attempts* at answers. People crack jokes, people post links to a barely related Wiki page, people make death threats and call us Nazis, or people post startlingly wrong information. And then of course there is the snowball effect of users who *don't* read the rules or the Automod comment, and start asking "Where are all the comments!?" We occasionally shares views of this, such as here[3] or here[4].
3: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/gu1xnq/-/fshh7dg/
4: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/5sqwlk/-/ddhmdc7/
A small minority of removed comments *are* good faith efforts at answering, which while showing some understanding of the rules, fall short for various reasons. These too, are removed of course, as we can't simply bend the rules willy-nilly, but in these cases, even if we don't post a public removal notice, we often reach out to users if we believe it likely that with a little nudge and a bit of coaching, they can get their answer up to what we expect.
We've been doing this for *years*, and have heard plenty of suggestions on what we should be doing instead, or simple claims that our philosophy is in error. Telling us, though, that "a bad answer is better than no answer" not only misses the point of this subreddit, but certainly says something odd about the writer, who essentially admits to us that they would *rather* learn incorrect information as long as it means they have something to read! No one should be surprised that "No answer is better than a bad answer" is a fairly core value for us, and one which we seek to attain here, but *anyways*, to run through a few of the most common things that we hear!
Upvotes have some uses. Nothing warms our hearts more than to see a rules-breaker ruthlessly downvoted in the few short minutes before the Mod Team manages to remove it, but their utility only goes so far. In History, being correct isn't something that is determined by popular consensus. It is something which is determined by good historical practices! While even the Moderation team isn't infallible, we review answers against an involved and carefully developed set of criteria, and we have a damn good track record while doing so! But we have seen plenty of comments getting quickly upvoted, despite being *very* wrong, in the span between posting and review by a moderator, so we know very well that the consensus of laypersons can be far from correct in many cases.
For those who remember when the Colbert Show debuted, "The Wørd" of the first episode was Truthiness, which is:
The quality of stating concepts or facts one wishes or believes to be true, rather than concepts or facts known to be true.
In a nutshell, *that* is what Upvotes determine. Not the correctness of the comment, but its Truthiness, its comportment with what the user *thinks* is true - or at least sounds it - but they often might be quite wrong about. An example I use is this thread[5], which saw innumerable comments about the Transatlantic Accent, the one fact about mid-century accents everyone seems to know. That *isn't* the answer, but it doesn't matter, without removal the upvotes certainly would have determined it was hours before anyone wrote something to the contrary.
5: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/bwf6ty
The Moderation Team isn't claiming infallibility, but we are claiming that we have the tools and experience to do a pretty good job at this. Certainly a much better one than the average user is capable of, and that of course is *why* so many users come here!
In the first, we wouldn't want to do this. Removal is a metaphorical stick that might not work against users who don't yet know the rules, but at least keeps most of those who do at bay. Take that away, and the floodgates are unleashed, as this simply incentivizes users to post poor quality answers, not to mention increases our workload considerably.
More importantly though, *we literally can't*. Reddit doesn't have that functionality! Only threads can be Flaired, not Comments! Please, at least suggest things which are technically possible, even if we won't like it...
That is kind of like the worst of both worlds, isn't it? Why would we allow wrong information to stick around even for a little bit? Why would we implement something that still disincentivizes higher quality contributions like that would? Of all the suggestions we get regularly, this one baffles the most. I don't understand the people who explicitly state that they would be happy to read bad information as long as they have something to read... Very odd suggestions.
A few reasons! While we have an Automod comment with the Rules and a 'Remind Me' link, we lock it to prevent replies as we don't want that to happen! First off, one of the most frustrating things that users bring up - and which we agree! - is that the comment count reflects all comments, whether removed or not. The higher the comment count, the more likely it is people assume there is an answer. Allowing something like that will only mean the comment count rises *even quicker*, but still without an answer to the question.
Additionally though, that increase in comments *still* would need to be moderated. It wouldn't be a true free-for-all space, and whatever limits were relaxed there, we'd still need to enforce the ones that exist. This is potentially a massive increase in moderator workload, not just in volume, but also in the kinds of interactions we would have to deal with. None of us signed up to moderate a discussion subreddit, and few of us want to. It takes a whole different kind of moderation to deal with, and it is one that, as a team, we are not interested in handling.
Finally, more philosophically, it doesn't suit the nature of the subreddit. College classes don't have a back-row set aside for students who want to crack jokes and yell out their half-brained opinions, and while we aren't the academy itself, we do aim to provide a more academic atmosphere than the rest of reddit. It just isn't conducive to our aims here. If we allow users to post their guesses *there*, other people are still reading them, and perhaps they never come back so it is the *only* thing they read, despite it being incorrect! Why would we want to allow that to happen, and to undercut the aims we have here?
What we do here isn't censorship, it is curation. If the rules were secret, or if we moderated in a wildly different manner than the rules stated, it most certainly might be so, but all we do is remove comments which break the clearly stated rules of the subreddit in an effort to create a certain kind of space to be enjoyed by people who want that experience. Just like you would get kicked out of the silent reading room at the library for blasting death metal on your BT speaker, you'll get kicked out of here for breaking *our* rules. Not enjoying something that other people do enjoy doesn't make you somehow right for fighting against it and trying to ruin it for others. It makes you an asshole.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You can find the rest of this Rules Roundtable series here
Comment by Pinchechangoverga at 28/06/2020 at 14:49 UTC
67 upvotes, 1 direct replies
I love the moderation of this sub. Keep running a tight ship, and never change.
It would be a little funny if this post got deleted...
Comment by [deleted] at 28/06/2020 at 23:04 UTC
16 upvotes, 0 direct replies
I appreciate the rules on this subreddit. Keep up the good work mod team
Comment by Asinus_Docet at 29/06/2020 at 12:51 UTC
14 upvotes, 1 direct replies
I only stayed on this sub and pursued to be a part of its community because of the moderation team. I feel like I can actually take my time, go back to my books, catch up on my reading, then come up with a lengthy answer. It will have value. It feels safe to do it here. It really helps not to feel under pressure, forced to compete for upvotes while being drowned amid poor or shortsighted answers. Thanks to the moderation team, I feel that my "work" as a historian is worth to spend time on (even if I only get a couple upvotes). I wouldn't do it otherwise. It'd be too stressful...
Comment by Tired8281 at 28/06/2020 at 20:01 UTC
17 upvotes, 1 direct replies
Sometimes I wish there was a way to discuss questions and answers in a less formal way. Obviously I wouldn't want it to be in the threads here, I love the way you run things. But it would be nice if there was like, another sub, where people could discuss stuff they read on this sub. Especially with all the unprecedented things going on in the world right now, there's been a few times where we were talking about something 30-40 years ago and I'm just itching to ask about how it relates to/impacts things happening now, which of course would be inappropriate here.
Comment by fiona0000 at 29/06/2020 at 04:10 UTC
6 upvotes, 0 direct replies
I love this sub. It is perhaps my favorite. Please keep it awesome.
Comment by WhyIsWyatt at 09/12/2020 at 02:26 UTC
1 upvotes, 1 direct replies
How do you guys determine what is true and what is false for very unique questions?
Comment by Cairpre409 at 14/12/2020 at 14:07 UTC
1 upvotes, 1 direct replies
When I see a post has fourteen comments, but I can only see one does that mean they have been blocked or removed without the count being affected.
Or does that mean I have a problem with my privacy and or other blockers on my browser?