I wanted to share my open-source solution on Reddit. I created an account, found a community where people post links to their projects, and posted a link to my GitHub project there. The post was immediately deleted, and my account was banned.
It turns out you first need to write
Unpopular opinion: in this case, the system worked as intended for the benefit of the community. If all this person really has to contribute is a link to their own content, it’s spam.
Why isn’t his project valuable? You’re saying other people should share it rather than the author sharing it. But how are other people going to find out about it first?
Based on the votes, your opinion seems popular, but I don’t find it rational.
I’m not saying the project isn’t valuable. It could be extremely valuable. And I think it’s ideal if the author shares rather than someone else, so long as they’re a community member in good standing, with a positive contribution history. Real communities are made of people who engage, not just links, even if the links are good.
In this case ban makes sense to me because the account has nothing else to contribute, other than quota-meeting fluff. I never said ban everyone who breaks the rules. Again, I’m only talking about the example in the OP. But yes, warnings and content removals are also good moderation tools.
As a former mod of a large community I hated that small writers and creators bloggers were lumped in with the spammers. You want to know why Reddit became generic and boring? Why the internet doesn’t feel boundless and weird anymore? Because over time only large established websites were permitted to be linked to without getting immediately IP banned.
When /r/StarTrek was small and I was trying to grow it, I invited several Trek bloggers I liked to post their writings. These weren’t “blogspam”, they were just people who just loved writing. They would always engage with the community in the comments under their posts. Over time they all were banned and their domains were blocked from being shared by any account on Reddit.
I agree with you that the system is working “as intended” but the intent sure feels a lot like forcing anyone making OC to be platform-locked to Reddit or risk having their entire domains be labeled as “spam”.
Reddit blocks a lot of established websites, too, like websites that are pretty basic. It’s up to Reddit, but still they wonder why they’re always so shocked and flabbergasted by current events. This is why.
You’re describing different situation, where the system did not work for the benefit of the community. It’s not about the domain that’s linked, it’s about the genuine community engagement. Your writers were active community members so I’d want their posts too.
You and I may see it that way, but Reddit does not consider it a different situation. And by Reddit I mean not only the algorithms that determine spam, but a non-insignificant amount of users at large that consistently reported small publications as spam.
Unpopular opinion: in this case, the system worked as intended for the benefit of the community. If all this person really has to contribute is a link to their own content, it’s spam.
Why isn’t his project valuable? You’re saying other people should share it rather than the author sharing it. But how are other people going to find out about it first?
Based on the votes, your opinion seems popular, but I don’t find it rational.
I’m not saying the project isn’t valuable. It could be extremely valuable. And I think it’s ideal if the author shares rather than someone else, so long as they’re a community member in good standing, with a positive contribution history. Real communities are made of people who engage, not just links, even if the links are good.
Why a ban and not a warning or content removal? Are we just getting used to the idea that we execute people as a first line of corrective action?
In this case ban makes sense to me because the account has nothing else to contribute, other than quota-meeting fluff. I never said ban everyone who breaks the rules. Again, I’m only talking about the example in the OP. But yes, warnings and content removals are also good moderation tools.
As a former mod of a large community I hated that small writers and creators bloggers were lumped in with the spammers. You want to know why Reddit became generic and boring? Why the internet doesn’t feel boundless and weird anymore? Because over time only large established websites were permitted to be linked to without getting immediately IP banned.
When /r/StarTrek was small and I was trying to grow it, I invited several Trek bloggers I liked to post their writings. These weren’t “blogspam”, they were just people who just loved writing. They would always engage with the community in the comments under their posts. Over time they all were banned and their domains were blocked from being shared by any account on Reddit.
I agree with you that the system is working “as intended” but the intent sure feels a lot like forcing anyone making OC to be platform-locked to Reddit or risk having their entire domains be labeled as “spam”.
Reddit blocks a lot of established websites, too, like websites that are pretty basic. It’s up to Reddit, but still they wonder why they’re always so shocked and flabbergasted by current events. This is why.
I’m with you on all of that
You’re describing different situation, where the system did not work for the benefit of the community. It’s not about the domain that’s linked, it’s about the genuine community engagement. Your writers were active community members so I’d want their posts too.
You and I may see it that way, but Reddit does not consider it a different situation. And by Reddit I mean not only the algorithms that determine spam, but a non-insignificant amount of users at large that consistently reported small publications as spam.