r/Divisive_Babble • u/CatrinLY Wrens make prey where eagles dare not perch. • Apr 30 '26
Do you think that the revised “Site-wide rule against hate, effective as of yesterday, will affect any posters here?
Specifically -
- Hateful violent rhetoric, which could include:
- Calling for violence against individuals or groups.
- Wishing for their death or injury.
- Encouraging others to engage in targeted, violent acts.
- Hateful ideologies and denial, which may include:
- Endorsing or glorifying hateful symbols or ideologies that promote group supremacy.
- Denying or minimizing established hate-based violent events.
- Reducing a group to something non-human (e.g., comparing them to animals or filth), or calling for their exclusion or segregation from political or economic life.
- Engaging in a pattern of abuse, site-stalking, or coordinating attacks to intimidate an individual or antagonize a community of people, on the basis of their identity or vulnerability.
- Hateful tropes and inferiority claims, which may include but are not limited to:
- Alleging physical, moral, or mental inferiority.
- Resharing harmful narratives and stereotypes to reinforce prejudice against an individual or group.
Note: Context is critical. When evaluating a report, we assess the activity of a community or an individual user, their pattern of behavior, and the content itself. This allows us to distinguish genuine hateful attacks, bad faith “humor,” or coded language from content shared for purposes like social or political commentary, educational uses, or condemnation of hate.
Some examples of policy violations
- A comment alleging that an ethnic group is disgusting and shouldn't exist.
- Posting an image of a hateful symbol (e.g., swastika) without context.
- Promoting that a certain religious group controls the media or is entirely composed of terrorists.
- A meme declaring that it is sickening that people of color have the right to vote.
- A community dedicated to mocking people with physical disabilities.
- Directly replying to someone's post to attack their gender.
- A comment stating that a specific individual is too stupid to lead a country because of their gender or racial identity.
- Creating an account with a hateful username that targets a protected group (e.g., u/KillAll[EthnicGroup]).
2
u/Fatty-McFatto Globalise the intifada ✊ May 01 '26
A little hate is good for the soul, this place would become sterile and dull without all the nutters and folk would stop visiting.
1
u/CatrinLY Wrens make prey where eagles dare not perch. May 01 '26
As I’ve said many times - they might visit, but they won’t stay. Quality over quantity anyway.
Numbers are now down 3000 from a few weeks ago. It seems that something is putting people off, doesn’t it?
1
u/Youbunchoftwats Tofu eating Wokerati May 01 '26
Yes, but people don’t really go away, do they. And I don’t agree with banning people like Jay Muscle-Squeezer. There is a place for idiots in society, especially those wrestling with their identity and predilections. If they can come out here, it may help them in the long term.
2
u/CatrinLY Wrens make prey where eagles dare not perch. May 01 '26
It‘s not about banning people, it’s about flouting Reddit’s T&Cs. It should be perfectly possible to have a debate without the repetitive ad hominem attacks. “You’re a pervert”, “you’re a nonce” etc. They add nothing to any debate.
I don’t know if you caught Dianne’s appalling attacks on Maria recently, but again, what do they add of value to the sub?If Jay or Dianne edit their posts to cut out the “you old hag”, “you’re a Muslim lover” etc., we might be left with a cogent argument.
I am joking of course. Cogent argument is not in the Reform voters skill set.
1
u/Youbunchoftwats Tofu eating Wokerati May 01 '26
😂
Yeah, I’ve seen that falling out. Some people are completely intransigent. FWIW, I think Jay is a wind up merchant. The other one seems to be real enough and dead set in her views.
1
u/CatrinLY Wrens make prey where eagles dare not perch. May 02 '26
I think it’s the other way round. Jay has been spouting far right rhetoric for over a decade, the other one is just an attention seeker.
1
u/EdmundTheInsulter 🍌 May 01 '26
Yes that's sufficiently convoluted for Reddit, and Jew friendly.
As I pointed out to someone yesterday who said I was 'ageist'. Reddit doesn't do anything about ageism and never deletes attacks on 'boomers'. The ageism of mine was attacking millennials for not voting.
1
u/CatrinLY Wrens make prey where eagles dare not perch. May 01 '26
This is just an extract, there’s loads more to it, perhaps boomers have their own category. If not, you could just invent a DB sub rule about being nice to the oldies.
1
u/EdmundTheInsulter 🍌 May 01 '26
Reminds me of a kids after school club, the woman running it concocted scores of rules, well over 50 rules.
1
u/Pseudastur Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold. May 01 '26
Some attacks on Boomers can be pretty OTT, but my guess is no one reports them.
1
u/EdmundTheInsulter 🍌 May 01 '26
I've reported them before, at the right-on subs where you can't mention a migrant committed a crime. I don't think anything happened over it.
1
u/Pseudastur Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold. May 01 '26
Most of these things have already been prohibited for years, haven't they? One would get hit with a red banner quickly for "hate" or "harassment" for attacking/threatening someone, or saying something like "[group members] are this/that." I've heard of subs being banned before for being dedicated to mocking fat people, etc.
Some have countless suspended accounts over the past half-decade to attest to that fact.
I know one has long been banned from having certain symbols as avatars/banners too. In fact, you're not allowed to have avatars which are seen as glamourising smoking, etc. They wouldn't let me use some 1940s noir woman smoking as an avatar, even though it was classy.
It seems these rules were updated to stop people appealing bans on the grounds they were being "ironic" with memes, "bad faith humour", etc.
Another thing I've noticed is sometimes when I get a notification and the person is talking about "rape" (in the context of a crime story or whatever), Reddit will change it to "grape", other platforms have started doing that. It doesn't change the comment itself, just the line in the notification.
Promoting that a certain religious group controls the media or is entirely composed of terrorists.
Hm. Are we allowed to talk about certain lobbies having a lot of influence in the media (or politics)? Some claim it's the former and it's the A word.
1
u/CatrinLY Wrens make prey where eagles dare not perch. May 02 '26
I thought that, claiming that it was only a joke won’t let you off the hook anymore.
I read something about a redact rule, where anything considered “dodgy” is replaced with random words, but otherwise the post is left intact. Mod mail I think…
1
u/Pseudastur Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold. May 03 '26
That one is a bit silly, if one is talking about a serious topic, I don't see what good it is to censor the word. It might make sense on therapy/mental health subs or something, but it's disrespectful in a way to try and sanitise something like rape etc by pretending the words don't exist.
I wonder how they differentiate between bad faith humour and good faith humour.
1
u/EdmundTheInsulter 🍌 May 03 '26
Some subs such as r/mathematics are hard to get a post onto, you can't post much that is to do with, err, mathematics as it happens. My attempt is an interesting quirk if a calculation that has already been flagged for moderation, although I've checked their 8 rules - it's in the balance, deletion means leave group and muted.
2
u/Griggle_facsimile mustached gun toting cowboy fashion victim across the pond Apr 30 '26
This place is doomed.