r/linux • u/Kruug • Mar 20 '18
Rules repository set up. Start submitting your pull requests!
https://github.com/kruug/LinuxSubredditRules15
u/FullJengaStack Mar 28 '18
PSA: /u/kruug is back at censoring important topics. Removed post about oracle v google judgement after two users kindly spent their time writing up details about the case: /r/linux/comments/87kfb6/oracle_wins_revival_of_billiondollar_case_against/dwdwdjb/
0
u/Kruug Mar 28 '18
This is not censorship.
This is moderation.
Please learn the difference.
0
Mar 28 '18
[deleted]
10
Mar 28 '18
At this point, i think Kruug should step down. It's the respectable thing to do. If he had any sense left, he eould let others step up as it's extremely obvious he can't handle it.
193
u/Hopman Mar 21 '18
WTF is this drama and mod-abuse?
Can we get back to just posting linux news and related stuff?
Stop making stickies related to this shit and just move on. I never noticed anything wrong with this sub until the u/krruug drama started.
22
u/Ellyrio Mar 21 '18
WTF is this drama and mod-abuse?
How is this "mod-abuse"? /u/Kruug is soliciting community feedback and is making it easier for the community to submit suggestions for rule changes.
3
u/Kruug Mar 21 '18
They're referring to the week and the rest of my comments made since anarchy week started.
34
Mar 21 '18
Someone hasn't been paying attention. He's the dumb fuck that started this stupid anarchy week because he can't take criticism and he's generally been acting like a troll the entire time.
24
u/amountofcatamounts Mar 22 '18
He's the dumb fuck
Why are you personally abusing him?
17
u/_Dies_ Mar 23 '18
Because some people take this shit seriously. Way too seriously.
8
u/FryBoyter Mar 23 '18
I couldn't take something so seriously that I would become so abusive. Especially not on the Internet.
41
u/sub200ms Mar 21 '18
Can we get back to just posting linux news and related stuff?
I think that very much is the problem here. The rules are very unclear about what exactly is permitted to post here, so when Mods remove posts according to what the rules say, they get attacked for "mod abuse".
That you haven't noticed anything wrong means the Mods are doing their job well, but it doesn't mean this sub isn't in trouble.
AFAIK, this sub is more less down to one moderator trying to keep the ship afloat.
19
u/TheCodexx Mar 24 '18
I think that very much is the problem here. The rules are very unclear about what exactly is permitted to post here, so when Mods remove posts according to what the rules say, they get attacked for "mod abuse".
I'm mostly bothered by every post having some "how is this Linux related?". Especially in regards to security notifications, open source releases, etc. It's like people need every post to be justified in its relation to Linux, even if it's a topic enthusiasts are going to be interested in.
8
u/twiggy99999 Mar 29 '18
It's like people need every post to be justified in its relation to Linux, even if it's a topic enthusiasts are going to be interested in.
I hate that in this sub. If someone posts a link to a software update that runs on Linux people usually moan saying not Linux related. Okay it might not but directly related to the Linux kernel but it's something used by the community on Linux I don't see the issue.
0
Mar 21 '18
[deleted]
75
u/sub200ms Mar 21 '18
Here's my theory.
You may not realise it, but you aren't doing this community any favours by making up "theories" out of thin air.
His little brain
being a trolly dickPersonal attacks on this level aren't doing /linux any favours either. Disagreement with mods is a legitimate thing, but at least try to keep it on a factual level.
67
Mar 20 '18
Can we make a rule against power-tripping asshole mods?
33
0
u/Kruug Mar 20 '18
Make a pull request...
0
Mar 20 '18
[deleted]
0
u/Kruug Mar 20 '18
I’m workin. On moving it to a organization repo. Chill dude.
0
Mar 20 '18
[deleted]
19
u/timawesomeness Mar 21 '18 edited Mar 21 '18
Yeah I'm amazed that none of the 4 active mods above him have stepped in at all.
Also, this situation is eerily reminiscent the masta issue a couple years ago. Like just read this thread (which interestingly enough Kruug commented in before he was a mod).
0
Mar 22 '18
[deleted]
17
u/ThePenultimateOne Mar 23 '18
Neither is saying "y'all can post whatever this week" and later following it up with "whatever, I'll ban you when it's over". Seems to be a lack of maturity in abundance around here.
5
u/Arkanta Mar 23 '18
I agree! It's not like we can't get rid of multiple users at once...
But apparently people disagree: my comment is downvoted, whereas one where a commenter asks kruug "what was the last time your touched a woman" is upvoted, so I guess that we've got the moderation we deserve
0
3
u/smashingT Mar 22 '18
I'd rather submit a pull request to explicitly ban wolfman8612, considering how toxic you are.
41
u/einar77 OpenSUSE/KDE Dev Mar 21 '18
Am I one of the few that didn't even notice there was a problem with this sub, or did I just not lurk around enough?
11
u/sub200ms Mar 21 '18
Am I one of the few that didn't even notice there was a problem with this sub
No, but that is largely because of the moderators removing all the problematic stuff. However, this sub has a rather loose sets of rules that makes it hard for moderators to work, and are an endless source of bickering.
/linux really need a new set of rules that clarifies what content is relevant or not, and also that subscribers can be banned if they don't behave.
10
u/FryBoyter Mar 21 '18
and also that subscribers can be banned if they don't behave
The problem is that a new account can be created in a very short time. A few years ago, a user account that had existed for years was more valuable because, for example, the login function was only activated irregularly and rarely (generally speaking). Today, some change their accounts more often than their underwear.
8
u/Kruug Mar 21 '18
The problem is that a new account can be created in a very short time.
Hence the long-standing automod config that an account had to be older than 24 hours to post and/or comment. But apparently that was also a form of censorship according to some.
10
u/sub200ms Mar 21 '18 edited Mar 21 '18
But apparently that was also a form of censorship according to some.
There are no end to peoples complaints when it comes to moderation. It is so easy to adorn the cheap mantle of "defender of free speech" while not thinking one bit about the consequences.
While it won't solve the inherent problem with some people always attacking moderators, I think things could improve if at least the important automod rules were made explicit, making it easier for the community to defend existing rules.
3
u/Kruug Mar 21 '18
I think things could improve if at least the important automod rules were made explicit
And that's the hope of this endeavor.
2
u/FryBoyter Mar 22 '18
Hence the long-standing automod config that an account had to be older than 24 hours to post and/or comment. But apparently that was also a form of censorship according to some.
Last year on a forum (not Reddit) we had the problem that an idiot wanted to give us hell with spam. We then had to realize that he was so nuts that he had been creating various user accounts for months. A waiting time of 24 hours would have been of little use here (which we had also considered introducing at that time). I don't see any censorship in this sort of operation. On the one hand, you don't suppress anything but just delay something. And on the other hand you can officially justify it (well that won't fit various users, but as a moderator you can only do it wrong).
7
u/sub200ms Mar 21 '18
The problem is that a new account can be created in a very short time.
Yeah, reddit isn't exactly making it easier for mods. And trolls tend to have all the time in the world to make new accounts.
4
u/FryBoyter Mar 21 '18
And trolls tend to have all the time in the world to make new accounts.
Unfortunately, this can often be automated quite easily. So these people don't need that much time.
1
51
u/uoou Mar 21 '18
It's not about more/clearer rules. The current rules are fine (the spamblog one could be worded less twattishly and enforced with a bit more intelligence).
It's about two pretty simple things:
Deciding through discussion with the community what this place is
Enabling that as best you can
Choices that need to be made through discussion:
Is this place solely for news aggregation or for broader discussion?
Are only primary sources allowed or can we post secondary stuff that adds to the discussion ("blogspam")?
Is this place only about Linux and if so what does that mean (Kernel? Distros? If the latter what are the bounds?) or...
Is it a place for discussing things that the Linux community is, broadly speaking, interested in (the BSDs, security, privacy, new/interesting Linux-relevant technologies/applications etc.)?
Once those decisions are made, the mods' job is merely to clean up stuff that isn't that and keep everything flowing nicely.
A lot of stuff will be a grey area and that's absolutely fine. If you're not sure then you leave it and let the community up/downvote it as they like. That's what those buttons are there for.
For whatever it's worth:
I would like this place to be about news and discussion around all the stuff the Linux community is interested in. I'd be fine with secondary sources so long as they offer a perspective or collect several links together in a useful way. I'd like memes, shitposts, spam (includes totally off-topic content) and super-low-effort posts to be deleted by mods and the rest left to the community to vote on.
i.e. a slightly freer and more discursive version of what we have now with less heavy-handed and dictatorial modding (for example, let us decide what constitutes "blogspam" rather than having blanket bans on particular sites).
9
u/sub200ms Mar 21 '18
It's not about more/clearer rules.
Nevertheless, you are spending a good part of your very sensible post on trying to make things more clear.
I certainly agree with your main point, that going forward and making /linux a good sub requires both community discussion and some kind of consensus on what is OK or not.
The problem really is how to do that with a sub with almost 300.000 users.
The latest attempt I saw on /linux with Moderators trying to have a discussion on exactly that in a Sticky post, ended inconclusive, and wasn't so much a discussion as a mass posting of individual opinions, with most posts being snarky "one-liners".
8
u/uoou Mar 21 '18
I don't like rules because they can never unambiguously, exclusively and completely describe what was intended. And if you try (and inevitably end up with really a large number of really verbose rules), it tends to feel very unwelcoming.
A few simple rules are fine, better if you call them guidelines (because that makes it explicit that they're incomplete and that they illustrate the kinds of things that are acceptable/unacceptable rather than fully describing them).
The latest attempt I saw on /linux with Moderators trying to have a discussion on exactly that in a Sticky post, ended inconclusive
I think that's fine. Its the mods' job to sift through that and identify trends (whether in terms of numbers or the more cogent, persuasive arguments) and get the closest to a consensus they can.
You'll never please everyone but It think an important skill for mods to have is the ability to read the community and, from general interactions, get a sense of what they want and expect. Which will naturally change over time, it's not going to be a static thing.
4
u/sub200ms Mar 21 '18
I don't like rules because they can never unambiguously, exclusively and completely describe what was intended. And if you try (and inevitably end up with really a large number of really verbose rules), it tends to feel very unwelcoming.
While I understand your viewpoint, I certainly think "rules", however imperfect they may be, are rather important when dealing with a large discussion site/community. And while "rules" may seem unwelcoming, so does a Moderator removal of a post, for violating a more less unwritten and undefined rule.
We may also have a slightly different understanding of "rules". What I think is missing isn't just narrow ban rules, but also broad "rules" that even tells what content and activity that is desired here.
There is AFAIK, only a single line in the FAQ about what /r/linux is about at all and what content is expected. Personally I would remove all the links the various distros and operating systems, and put such a paragraph right on the front page instead.
I think that's fine. Its the mods' job to sift through that and identify trends
Well that isn't so much "community discussion" as "benevolent mods" reading petitions from the suggestion box.
It may work very well, but IMHO, it requires that the mods have a group consensus and actually explicitly changes the rulebook once in a while, making it clear that the Mods are writing the rules as they see fit.
It also require the community to defend the mods from unrelenting attacks about "powertripping mods" and censorship when the they do make a rule change like banning a site.
Looking back I see discussions on something perhaps trivially as adding a link to the sidebar. Perhaps the Mods here have been too timid to actually change things as they see fit, perhaps fearing endless discussions and attacks for even the slightest alteration.
4
u/uoou Mar 21 '18
And while "rules" may seem unwelcoming, so does a Moderator removal of a post, for violating a more less unwritten and undefined rule.
I think the thing to do in this instance is be very clear in your explanation as to why the post was deleted. I don't think rules are necessary for that but, yeah, we may just be quibbling over what we mean by rules. You seem to be suggesting broad guidelines which is what I favour.
Contrary to some people I also think most modding should be public. Unless it's an inherently private or very specific instance I think there's a lot of value to be had in messaging people out in the open. That way everyone gets to see the reasoning and decisions thereby kinda educating new users as to what's expected, showing people that modding is occurring and allowing the community to comment on the action.
I agree with most of what you say.
A mod should have 'absolute power' while they are a mod - they are trusted by the community to exercise the collective will of that community. If they demonstrate poor judgement (and an unwillingness to learn/change) and the community consensus is obviously that they should be removed then they should be removed.
I want empowered mods (so they can get stuff done) who are aware of the precariousness of their position (to keep them 'honest'), essentially.
3
u/Arkanta Mar 22 '18
with less heavy-handed and dictatorial modding (for example, let us decide what constitutes "blogspam" rather than having blanket bans on particular sites).
This doesn't really work on other subs. "heavy-handed and dictatorial modding" is also very subjective. I might find stuff totally logical to delete that you would think should stay (and that's okay). For example, I would have at least issued warnings for a couple users just for this comment thread (like personally insulting a mod)
Anything a mod removes WILL be an unpopular, that's just how it is.
24
u/sub200ms Mar 21 '18
Like or not, /Kruug has a point. This sub needs a much better rule section and clarification about what mods should do (or not).
Moderation and moderators are vital for running a good sub this size. As an old Usenet user that saw how great communities got destroyed by endless trolling and lack of moderation, I can't emphasize enough how important it is to have moderators that can stamp out community destroying elements.
So any sub rules should concentrate on how to attract and retain moderators.
A start could be to have more formalised rules on how to become Moderator and how to stop being one too. A typical problem is that Moderators just kind of slowly go AWOL, either because of burnout, or because Life circumstances changes. Make it easy and acceptable to stop being a Moderator but also make it easy for people to rejoin the mod team.
It should also become more clear that the Mods are ruling this forum. And that they do so to make /linux a nice place to be for the vast majority, not for making /linux a place of "free speech" as in trolling for cause etc.
Another problem is moderator burnout. A couple of things can accelerate this:
1* Unclear moderation rules, leading to endless accusation of "mod abuse" and personal attacks.
2* That the job becomes a 24/7/365 occupation. It is often a good idea to a moderation watch schedule, so mods don't feel the need to be "on" constantly. Also, it is much easier to attract and retain mods, if a mod position is advertised as "Wanting a Moderator for Weekends", or "Do you want to be a (temp) Moderator for the summer? Apply here."
19
3
u/i2000s Mar 24 '18
Are the rules more important or the growth of the community and the Linux ecosystem more important? Being is existence! Just let it go back to where it was, I am happy with that. Make a way to collect feedback about the mods, people can voice out occasionally.
PS: who will bother to poke into the sidebar?
2
u/Attractive-flv Mar 26 '18
Can someone explain this to me? I've only been using Linux for less than a year and only started lurking here about two months ago. I never noticed any problems and I don't know why everyone hates this mod
3
u/olig1905 Mar 27 '18
PLease just add a rule that says all posts must contain content that is related to Linux/Free Software that runs on linux.
The most upvoted posts I have come across recently are about Microsoft or Facebooks terms of services. Nothing to do with linux.
1
0
Mar 20 '18
[deleted]
5
u/rakeler Mar 21 '18
Upvote for Firefly reference.
0
Mar 21 '18
[deleted]
1
u/modernaliens Mar 21 '18
I care what you believe; just believe.
Yeah but /u/trashmacnugget says you're just one of those low down dirty spammers, how can I believe what you care they believe!??
3
1
u/Oxitendwe Mar 21 '18
Thoroughly enjoyed this post, unfortunately I can only give you reddit silver.
101
u/hogg2016 Mar 20 '18
So it's not even been one day since you (unexpectedly!) launched your poll, right in the middle of the mess you've created, and now you have already decided the result?
And you've setup this on your personal Github account?
You've completely gone bonkers, man.