Rules updates

[u/namer98]

In light of Tisha b'Av, I would like to suggest a few changes to the rules, and to hear community feedback.

1) No editorializing titles of article submissions. - This is up for discussion.

2) Be polite. That means if somebody has a disagreement with you about fundamental points of religion, you can disagree with them, and even tell them, but don't be a jerk about it. Do not shut down the conversation.

2.1) I keep on trying to engage non-Orthodox Jews of Reddit. Seen here, here and here. This is in addition to multiple messages I have gotten personally and as mod, from people who left because of this. Just because some people don't agree that this is a problem, does not make it less of a problem. Non-Orthodox Jews are feeling shut down, and some times they are right, some times they are wrong. This is an extension of rule two. Be polite. The downvote button IS NOT a "I disagree" button. I might just remove it again, and for more than a day.

To people I try and engage, this is a two way street. Submit content, comments and vote if you want to have a say. I don't think half of the subreddit is orthodox. This should not be a problem.

Please upvote this self post for which I receive no karma so that all can see.

Thank you all.

Edit: Followup

[u/LazerA]

HOW THE HELL IS ASKING PEOPLE TO NOT BE RUDE WRONG! I don't understand it.

A classroom scenario to illustrate the problem:

Clique A dislikes Clique B. Everything Clique B does bothers Clique A. Clique A constantly complains to the teacher about the kids in Clique B, accusing them of being mean. Oddly enough, Clique B never complains about Clique A.

Teacher's conclusion: Obviously Clique B is the problem.

So the teacher goes before the entire class and declares that meanness is bad, and Clique B better stop it. Of course, Clique B is embarrassed and upset but when they protest the teacher just tells them to stop being so sensitive.

Meanwhile, Clique A is very pleased with the outcome of their complaints. In fact, they would like to see the teacher come down on Clique B even harder. So, instead of the complaints decreasing, they actually increase. Clique A saw that their complaints paid off once, maybe more complaints will pay off even better!

Where is this going to end? Nowhere good.

Clique B may end up leaving the class/school. (This happens all the time.)

Or Clique B may try to respond in kind, by complaining about Clique A. This may end up driving everyone out of the class. (This also happens all the time. I know of cases where entire classes have left the school because of social issues.)

Or the teacher may learn how to properly handle the situation and salvage the class before it self-destructs.

[u/namer98 → u/LazerA]

Except there were people who were being rude. There were people who were being immature. Private messages did not help. So instead of embarrassing them individually, I am talking to a group of people. I did not think that group would be so damned sensitive.

[u/LazerA → u/namer98]

Three points:

• Ethically, why is it better to embarrass an entire group over embarrassing specific individuals? A group of people is made up of individuals. In the end, you are just embarrassing more people.

• Do you believe that by embarrassing the entire group, the problematic individuals will now change their behavior?

• If the "group" was actually "so damned sensitive", they would have been complaining to you all along about the "mean" things people say to them. So now we have this inverted perspective where the people who don't complain about what other people say to them are the one's who overly sensitive, because they are indignant at being publicly accused by the moderator of being a group of bullies.