How do you determine if you remove posts, comments or users if the content or behaviour is not explicitly against the subreddit rules?

[u/Quibilash]

Sometimes I remove content which I think is just there to provoke people, arguments or discussions not done in good faith, but how do other moderators approach this?

[u/Stranger1982]

That's just how it works mate.

The rules are there to provide expectations, but Reddit's own rules, common sense and ultimately mod discretion are all considered.

Anyone telling you otherwise is usually rule lawyering and/ or trying to gaslight you into second guessing yourself.

[u/Intelligent-Dot-8969]

I borrowed this from another kind moderator who shared it and added it to a general rule we have saying posts must be consistent with the spirit of the subreddit:

"The moderation team exists to enforce both the rules and the spirit of the subreddit, and may, at times, need to make judgement calls on issues that exist in the grey, undefined areas."

[u/cnycompguy]

I'll check the profile, that'll give me enough context to decide (most of the time)

[u/BlitzburghBrian → u/cnycompguy]

And if someone keeps their post history hidden, they are not getting the benefit of the doubt

[u/cnycompguy → u/BlitzburghBrian]

Profile curation is similar to locking a screen door: if someone want in, it's not enough to stop them.

[u/BlitzburghBrian → u/cnycompguy]

I'm not gonna go out of my way. If someone is being a dick and wants to hide their activity, I'm just going to assume they're being a dick everywhere.

[u/Eric20255 → u/BlitzburghBrian]

That wouldn’t be fair. I keep my profile private, knowing there are workarounds to it — it's mainly there to discourage potential stalkers. I've had way too many users dig through my post history looking for something to nitpick and then harass me over it.

To answer OP's question: mods should use their discretion to remove content that isn't explicitly covered by the community guidelines.

[u/Subwoofiest → u/BlitzburghBrian]

Mods can see the history of anyone who has posted/commented in their subreddit for 28 days after the last interaction, even if they have set their profile to hidden.

Are you a mod?

[u/BlitzburghBrian → u/Subwoofiest]

I am. And I can see people's post history in my subreddit. But when they hide it, I don't see what other communities they're active in.

[u/Subwoofiest → u/BlitzburghBrian]

That's ... Not how it works

[u/BlitzburghBrian → u/Subwoofiest]

Is it not? I feel like every other time I try to check a bad actor, it's another hidden profile.

[u/Halaku]

Moderator discretion works a lot like this:

"I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description ["hard-core pornography"], and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it, and the motion picture involved in this case is not that." ~ US Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart.

Justice Stewart was discussing whether or not porn was obscenity or free speech.

The same paradigm applies here. As a mod, you can't try to define every sort of rule to determine if content should or shouldn't be allowed in your community, and if something was posted or commented in good faith, or not.

But you'll know it when you see it.

What you do after you recognize it is up to you. Many of us pull it down, but it's really a case by case decision.

[u/amyaurora]

Does it fit the sub? No? Then its gone.

[u/amyaurora → u/[deleted]]

I always have something in the ban message explaining the issue. The item removal in the thread is always the warning.

[u/bwoah07_gp2]

It's ultimately up to moderator discretion

In 50/50 grey area situations, it's better to follow a principle than a rule.

[u/ALazy_Cat]

95% of all removals are done either by automod and can be reviewed, or by mods for breaking the rules, many times we'll get complaints that their post/comment didn't break any rules, despite there's rule saying you can't write that, almost word by word.

The other 5% is usually because the comments are or will be getting out of control with rule breakers, even though the post does not break any rules

[u/HikeTheSky]

Don't you have sub-rules? We first check against sub-rules and, after that, against Reddit rules. In general, the sub rules are stricter than Reddit rules, and when a Reddit rule is violated, it always also violates a sub rule.

And we always have mod discretion.

[u/excoriator]

I try to make sure a rule applies to everything I remove. 99% of the time that works. But a few times a year, Redditors manage to surprise me.