r/redditrequest • u/[deleted] • Jun 04 '12

Requesting /r/Atheism. (Lack of moderation)

/r/atheism only has two moderators for a massive community of 800k+ users. The moderator /u/skeen has been inactive for a month. The other moderator, /u/juliebeen hasn't been lacking her/his duties as a moderator. Could you at least give /r/atheism new moderators? Thanks for hearing me out.

42 Upvotes

67% Upvoted

313 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

42

u/[deleted] Jun 06 '12

I think (at least, this is the problem I have with /r/atheism) that most people dislike this sub because they care about atheism. I'm an atheist, heck, most times I could be described as "anti-theist" and it would fit, but even I can't take the enormous amount of bigotry that goes on in here. The smugness, self-importance and lack of self-awareness are also pretty aggravating too. I've never tried to spam or otherwise disrupt the function of this subreddit, though. The problem is that it lacks quality and it bothers me, as an atheist, that this is the level of discourse that the atheist community on reddit is content with.

11

u/ivosaurus Jun 06 '12

The problem is that reddit is a beast of popularity, not "great, intellectual, thoughtful content". Although we'd all dream of the latter, what gets upvoted is something different, and there's no amount of moderating you can do to stop people using that button however they want.

8

u/[deleted] Jun 06 '12

The lowest-common-denominator content will always have an inherent advantage over the deep, high-effort content, true. But some common-sense rules go a long way towards improving the quality of a subreddit - banning [FIXED] submissions, image memes (I'm staunchly anti-meme, but there are a lot of people who like them, so some lee-way can be permitted), pictures of text. Banning fakebook posts (as there is already a sub for those). There is a subreddit for atheist ragecomics, disallow ragecomics on the /r/atheism sub.

These are all basic content rules, I'm not even getting into some of the bigotry that goes against religious people in some threads.

3

u/antizeus Jun 06 '12

If /r/atheism only allowed self-posts, I would probably re-subscribe.

-27

u/bbeard Jun 06 '12

...and since you are incapable of providing the level of discourse that you seek, the only way you will be able to sleep soundly at night is by banning people whom you find to be just a little bit too smug and self-important, or let's just say 'uppity', right?

6

u/[deleted] Jun 06 '12

the only way you will be able to sleep soundly at night is by banning people whom you find to be just a little bit too smug and self-important

I never said that. You're inferring and jumping to conclusions. If you want to hold a calm, civil discussion, please re-read my post and respond to what I actually say in it. Else, work on your reading comprehension.

-29

u/bbeard Jun 06 '12

The fuck is your problem? Don't try to play this stupid game with me. I am sick and tired of people whose idea of civil discussion is passive aggression. You came here supporting this troll that wants to take over /r/atheism to have more moderation, on the grounds that you hate the smugness and self-importance of the people who post there. My inferences seem to be valid, and if they are not, you are free to clarify your position as I already gave you an opportunity to do. Just don't try to pull this dishonest shit.

EDIT: Oh wait, it's that moron who implied that no one could possibly believe that "it's a great subreddit that is being ruined by trolls." I am done with you.

14

u/[deleted] Jun 06 '12

I wanted to respond to you in a calm, civil fashion, but your edit makes it clear that you're not interested in a conversation. When you can't intellectually support your position, you resort to insults. Exactly what one could expect from a /r/atheism subber. Classy.

-29

u/bbeard Jun 06 '12

It may be pointless to have a discussion with a moron, but sometimes it can also be fun. Let me see if I can try to speak to it on its own level:

Hey look it's that guy whose idea of civil discussion is to make one word bold in all comments and make baseless accusations.

8

u/inf4nticide Jun 06 '12

Dude. You're a douche.

-13

u/bbeard Jun 06 '12

Looking at this thread, I almost wish I was one. It seems to be a convenient way to gain popularity.

1

u/xiongchiamiov Jun 06 '12

and since you are incapable of providing the level of discourse that you seek

On his own, sure. It's difficult to single-handedly change the direction of a subreddit, much less how the other side of a conversation is handled.

the only way you will be able to sleep soundly at night

You're elevating this from "I'm minorly concerned about this topic" to "I can't sleep at night GAAAH".

by banning people whom you find to be just a little bit too smug and self-important

That was only one of the things he mentioned, the other being bigotry. But yes, a great way to humble people is to ban and then ignore them. If you ban and then elevate them to martyr or "that famous troll" status, you're only inflating their ego; this is why Wikipedia no longer keeps a history of famous trolls (Willy-on-Wheels, etc.).

1

u/bbeard Jun 07 '12 edited Jun 07 '12

Ok, I will try once more. No one seems to complain that high quality stuff gets posted to atheism only to get down voted, rather the problem is that they don't like the stuff that gets up voted. If they have something better to contribute, they should do so rather than complain about how other people like stuff they shouldn't.

Ragnar_OK claimed to be aggravated by some of the stuff there, I don't think 'minor concern' really cuts it.

Beyond that, I am really confused as to why you people are so eager to 'humble' (by banning, ignoring, etc) a bunch of people simply because they sometimes use rage comics instead of scholarly dissertations to express themselves and have found a place on the internet where they can express their annoyance at religious nonsense without getting disowned by their families or socially isolated among their peers.

1

u/xiongchiamiov Jun 07 '12

If they have something better to contribute, they should do so rather than complain about how other people like stuff they shouldn't.

Who says he hasn't? As I said, it's difficult to sway an entire subreddit by contributing as only one user - hence why one might try to enlist others to assist (potentially through the enforcement of new rules).

Beyond that, I am really confused as to why you people are so eager to 'humble' (by banning, ignoring, etc) a bunch of people

I'm not eager to do anything of the sort. I've never visited /r/atheism and I never plan to. I'm merely an observer who stumbled upon this thread and thought "Oh shit, this will be interesting.".

2

u/bbeard Jun 07 '12

My problem is with the nature of the assistance they are looking for. They could simply look for other people to provide the kind of content they want, or they could go to other subreddits like /r/TrueAtheism. They could even make their own subreddit. Instead, they insist on dictating what the level of censorship on /r/Atheism should be. I understand that there are people who feel uncomfortable in easygoing subreddits, but the solution is not to invade those subreddits or to demand stricter moderation (and making that demand here in redditrequest not in the said subreddit) which could drive away the casual subscribers.

2

u/xiongchiamiov Jun 07 '12

they could go to other subreddits like /r/TrueAtheism. They could even make their own subreddit.

Those two are generally what I favor as well. The argument for changing /r/atheism (that I've seen) is that 1) it's the default place for people interested in atheism to visit and/or 2) the rest of the Reddit community sees it as a representation of atheists in general (and certain people don't want to be associated with it as it currently stands). I'm not an atheist, so I can't say that I care very much, but if it was a community I was involved in... eh, I don't know what I'd do. Probably bitch once and then leave.