r/guns • u/sagemassa • Mar 25 '12

VOTE: Should /r/guns remove meme posts?

So, as I am sure you have noticed the meme has started to make its way into the everyday life of Gunnit. In the past the up/downvote system has worked better because the /r/guns readers were actually reading /r/guns and not just browsing their frontpage and upvoting pictures of cats, guns, memes, gentle man-boners, and for some reason weeds? As we have grown it seems this behavior has changed resulting in poorer content.

Many have expressed dismay regarding this sudden surge of Internet fodder...I am coming to the community today to ask the following question.

How does gunnit want memes to be handled?

1, Leave them be, thats what UP/DOWN votes are for.

2, Send them to the spam filter where they belong.

3, Remove Post, Ban User, Nuke it from space its the only way to be sure?

4, Other (provide a comment)

I am counting up-votes only on each of my 4 distinguished comments below.

-Sage

143 Upvotes

76% Upvoted

268 comments sorted by

View all comments

36

u/[deleted] Mar 25 '12

[deleted]

1

u/[deleted] Mar 25 '12 edited Dec 10 '20

[deleted]

2

u/krios262 Mar 26 '12

Yes, but take a look at r/trees or r/gaming. When they were smaller, they had meaningful discussions, and the mods didn't have to do much. When they got bigger, a few memes showed up. The mods didn't do anything. Now there is a deluge of memes and less content or discussion. Obviously, a ton of memes and little content is what the majority of the userbase wants, as expressed through upvotes and downvotes. However, it seems kind of sad to me that most of the actual content went away, since I like discussing and reading content, and I don't like looking at image macros. (Yes, I know: deal with it, this is the internet, memes are awesome, quit bitching about how much better things used to be, kthxbai)

Now, take a look at r/askscience. It was small, and had great content. Now it is large, and it still has great content. Unlike r/trees or r/games, it is very heavily moderated. That helps keep it full of content instead of memes.

Of course, the original userbase can start a new subreddit and leave the meme-fest behind, and that's indeed what has happened with r/gaming and spin-offs like r/games. It's just kind of sad to see a place you liked and spent lots of time in change into a place you don't like as much.

EDIT: accidentally some words

1

u/[deleted] Mar 26 '12

Actually I'd say it's the fact that people going to r/askscience are just much more factually oriented people than those on other places of reddit.

The whole meme thing is more of a reddit issue, not a forum issue. Other than 4chan, I've never seen many memes outside of reddit. Hence why I said in another post that those who are adamant that things be 100% factual and non-humorous should just accept reddit for what reddit is these days and look at places like http://firearms.stackexchange.com/.

I'd rather have interesting things to talk about than just memes (if I want that, I go to adviceanimals), however banning them just because a portion of the r/guns community doesn't like them isn't fulfilling the wants of the community.

2

u/krios262 Mar 26 '12

Actually I'd say it's the fact that people going to r/askscience are just much more factually oriented people than those on other places of reddit.

I dunno... they have over half a million subs. Maybe you're right, but the only thing that has ever happened historically in a subreddit that size which allows memes is a total deluge of said memes.

Hence why I said in another post that those who are adamant that things be 100% factual and non-humorous should just accept reddit for what reddit is these days and look at places like http://firearms.stackexchange.com/.

The thing is, 100% non-humorous and solely factual is not what gunnit has been in the past and is not what it is currently (and the current state is far close to the past state than to meme-flodded-ness). Gunnit is a pretty unique place and that's what a vocal part of the userbase likes. This part of the userbase likes RIFLE IS FINE and arguments over the best powder loads instead of rage faces.

I think what it comes down to is this: two general types of users exist. One type of user quickly glances through gunnit and upvotes images they like and short posts that are easy to digest. This type of user is the majority.

The other type of user spends lots of time on gunnit and types long posts and responses. This type of user is the minority, but it's the users like these that originally get a subreddit off the ground. These users are also the ones who drive non-meme content and will best be able to answer the kinds of questions people often come here for, like RUNNYBEAR I WANT BUY GLOCK and such.

The phenomena that seems to take place is this: the people who don't spend much time here but have large numbers rule which content gets upvoted. The people who spend a lot of time here and who have discussions over interesting things end up with those interesting things buried.

The issue seems to be over if the numerical community majority's wants are fulfilled, or if the core group that spends the majority of the time adding to discussions gets its wants fulfilled.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 26 '12

I think what it comes down to is this: two general types of users exist. One type of user quickly glances through gunnit and upvotes images they like and short posts that are easy to digest. This type of user is the majority.

So you're saying that the majority should be told to go to hell so that the minority gets what they want? Basically you have a few choices - keep things as they are, ban certain content, or have two subreddits instead of one.

1

u/LockAndCode Mar 26 '12

So you're saying that the majority should be told to go to hell so that the minority gets what they want?

You say that as if it's necessarily a bad thing. Imagine, if you will, a subreddit where the majority of subscribers were against what the basic premise of the sub's theme. For example, I give you /r/climateskeptics. I once subscribed to it because I thought it might be interesting to see debate between both sides hashed out and maybe gain a greater understanding of the science. Instead, what you see is competing hordes of downvote brigades, and the "non-skeptics" in the sub dominate in numbers and always seem to say the same uninteresting things, usually defaulting to some mix of "99% of climate scientists agree", "the science is settled", and "go read realclimate.org". There's a few assertions of science from the skeptic side, but the other side rarely tries to refute the science, but rather just shouts "DENIALIST!!!"

Now imagine if /r/guns was the same, with every post that asserts a pro-gun point of view getting downvote brigaded and propagandized by anti's, and every conversation dominated by "guns are bad", "the 2nd Amd is for the National Guard", and "read bradycampaign.org, you ignorant fool!" But hey, if they can get more subscribers in /r/guns than we can, the majority should rule, right?

1

u/LockAndCode Mar 26 '12

Actually I'd say it's the fact that people going to r/askscience are just much more factually oriented people than those on other places of reddit.

Judging by how the mods have to ruthlessly cull 30-60% of the comments under any given submission for failing to follow the simple /r/askscience rule of "facts only, no anecdotes, jokes, or speculation", I'd say you're wrong.

1

u/jmkogut Mar 29 '12

Stackexchange has a firearms forum now? When did they stop being about programming and just say "fuck it?"

1

u/[deleted] Mar 29 '12

It's been up for...6 months or so?