Howdy folks. We've had about a week to experiment with the new 24 Hour Reprieve flair approach to removals. In that time, we've removed a total of 35 posts and left up 143. I haven't been keeping formal track of how many were flaired and fixed, but my estimate is that about 50% of what we've flaired has been fixed and the flairs removed, and/or the submitter self-removed and reposted -- so about twice as many posts have been left up on the board.
Majority of removals are due to problematic titles
Of the 35 posts taken down in the nine days since the new flair system went live:
- 21 were Link posts that could not be edited
- 25 were Rule 3 removals because headlines did not clearly posit relevance to child sex abuse by the elite
There were several Discuss threads with vague headlines whose body text was edited to explain pizzagate relevance that we left up, and several that had inaccurate headlines that we either removed immediately or flaired and asked the submitter to self-remove. I'd like feedback about the best way to handle faulty headlines (before we get into revisiting the submission rules at some point soon).
It's not easy to repost Removed submissions with formatting and embedded links
To further complicate the issue, I did a test and confirmed that submitters cannot copypaste the source formatting of their threads to repost -- all embedded hyperlinks and text formatting must be rebuilt from scratch. :-( Headlines are difficult to write for many people and we cannot edit them. Is it worth possibly suppressing research and antagonizing researchers by removing Discuss posts solely due to problem headlines?
User @ll0O-O0ll suggested we create an "Edited Title" flair to use in combination with a better headline added by the submitter at the beginning of the post (formatted as a headline) for Discuss posts.
Please give feedback about the following questions:
1 - Should Link posts with problem headlines be given a 24 Hour Reprieve flair to gather feedback and better headline suggestions before being removed?
2 - Should Discuss threads with problem headlines that otherwise satisfy the submission rules get an "Edited Title" flair and new headline and be allowed to stay up since submitters can't copypaste formatting from Removed threads?
3 - Or, instead of option #2, should mods advise submitters of Discuss threads with problem headlines to copypaste and repost their work BEFORE the 24 Hour flair expires, while they still have access to the "source" markdown window?
4 - Is our requirement that headlines of all posts explain pizzagate relevance too onerous for users and mods? Would we be better off without it?
view the rest of the comments →
ESOTERICshade ago
I am also a #4 because only the people that watch the action around constantly really understand the rules well enough to comply regularly. Posting can be a tedious gauntlet for people who don't keep a steady eye on the rules although it seems relatively easy to those who understand it. If its a shit post the content of the post will quickly reveal it to be a shit post.
Maybe the rule could be reworded such as "please try to make title as relevant as possible and reflect the content of the post as closely as possible." At least the instruction and request are still there.
Other wise I think the flair experiment has been a real success. There is now a level of respect displayed for the time and effort of the posters here that this sub has never had in the past. Sincere efforts are being made and I see progress from the efforts. Great work guys :)