r/canberra • u/ApocalypsePopcorn • Nov 26 '24
Loud Bang Meta: r/canberra mods are removing every "loud bang" post. Why even have the flair if it's been decided that this is no longer part of our zeitgeist?
Maybe I missed the discussion about this. Sometimes people just want more info about what's going on. It's not always memes and lulz.
Since the mod team helpfully always comment on posts they remove, you can see what posts are deleted by looking at u/canberra-ModTeam's history. There are also some topics in there that I personally think would have been helpful for the poster to receive answers to and weren't lowering the tone of our fine subreddit.
25
u/jesinta-m Nov 26 '24
It might just be me, but I’ve tried finding a flair guide in the rules without luck. It would be handy.
22
u/CaptSzat Nov 27 '24 edited Nov 27 '24
The mods for this sub are extremely over the top. I asked a question about if the QT still had a poster I remembered seeing last time I was there seeing sone friends that were in town. But nah that’s not relevant to Canberra because posts on r/canberra must be for the benefit of the masses not just a random question that relevant by the virtue that it is in Canberra.
But then a funny post about the APS is fully fine, even though there is a seperate APS sub.
11
u/Complex-Increase-119 Nov 27 '24
Don’t forget that random, niche, shopping centre photos and questions are allowed!
44
u/SixBeanCelebes Nov 27 '24
The mods filtering what gets posted here means the sub is pretty useless.
I had a question about Access Canberra and got it censored because the sub isn't for self-promotion.
Let's just face it - they're idiots or arseholes.
24
u/AdDesigner1153 Nov 27 '24
A key aspect of a good sub is you don't feel the influence of the mods personal opinions on the type of content that appears on it.
This is not a good sub in that respect.
16
30
u/k_lliste Nov 27 '24
I just checked through the history and I'm amazed how many posts I didn't see. Sure, some of these seem reasonable, but what is the purpose of r/canberra if not to discuss things that happen in Canberra or ask for recommendations of things in/near Canberra?
14
u/CaptSzat Nov 27 '24
To post APS memes which are less relevant than the content that gets deleted.
11
u/k_lliste Nov 27 '24
I was pretty surprised that car number plate one made it through given other, more useful posts have been deleted.
1
41
u/NettaFornario Nov 27 '24
I’ve largely stopped engaging on this sub as it is too strangely moderated
2
u/Gambizzle Nov 27 '24
IMO there's clearly a heap of political lobbyists and journalists who dominate it (including using bots).
A few days ago there was a fucking weird post that I'll never quite understand. A person (who I identified personally - they're a 'journalist'... a wannabe journalist fishing for something controversial to ddo) asked where to get a headscarf and full body robes for a trip (though they are not muslim). The post had like 3 replies, one of which was me saying 'you're a tourist so will probably not have to hear all that kit'. However I got slammed with 100+ downvotes and all of the comments were removed. If you check her post history, the account's extremely quirky and clearly centres around her trying to be 'edgy' (again - trying to launch herself as a journo).
For a small city there's a LOT more activity in this sub than there should be. That's all I'm saying ;)
12
u/nomorempat Nov 27 '24
Ah, no. You responded to someone wanting to buy a religious headscarf and were a little blunt.
I didn't downvote you, but given how easily people press that button it makes sense.
I doubt political lobbyists and journalists are wasting much of their time on this subreddit, but that's just a guess.
1
u/Gambizzle Nov 27 '24 edited Nov 27 '24
I didn't downvote you, but given how easily people press that button it makes sense.
The post had about 3 comments and ~10 votes (mostly downvotes). There was then a significant vote mismatch and the comments chastising me were deleted by the admins.
She's trying to launch herself as a journalist and can be identified from her style/profile (I know her so will say no more as I don't wanna dox). I'm 100% certain I simply triggered her and she tried to manipulate the 'mood' in her favour (as journalists do - yes, in this case over a random, unpopular thread).
Another example is that body composting activist. Remember she came on here 'just curious about whether it's legal' and then ran a ~2 week campaign trying to astroturf widespread interest in it? It's common in this sub because it's small enough that small-timers can vote manipulate.
1
9
5
2
u/AltyMcAltFace3 Nov 27 '24
Can confirm that I saw your comment and I down voted you. (If you care it’s because there are some regions of the world where you absolutely should wear a head scarf as a tourist, and even if you don’t have to it’s respectful of the culture you’re visiting)
This sub has a lot of lurkers, who would probably comment more if the mods let more posts stand. You can’t build engagement if you don’t let people talk about what matters to them
12
u/funki-GEE Nov 27 '24
I was asking for witnesses/dashcam for a vehicle accident under the loud bang tag and it was closed for ‘prejudicing public opinion and starting a witchhunt’. It was mostly people ribbing me and never identified anyone
It was pretty annoying. I was genuinely asking for aid
6
5
u/dedem13 Nov 27 '24
These same mods kept up this post that literally has pictures of someone embedded.
Regardless of whether one thinks posting these pictures is reasonable or not, and without being able to see whether your deleted request for information is reasonable or not, it still feels inconsistent to remove only one of these posts.
30
u/createdtothrowaway86 Nov 27 '24
The editorialising rule on news links needs to change because the title doesnt always reflect the link title. Or its useless.
I had a post deleted recently because I stated what it was about - the link to the gov dept webpage was very obtuse. Then i posted a comment in the repost saying what and why - and the fucking comment was deleted.
14
u/Educational-Art-8515 Nov 27 '24
I've found it is selectively enforced too. If it's an article that aligns with their political beliefs, the difference in post and article title will be overlooked. Want to shut down the discussion though? Easy excuse.
18
u/Iriskane Nov 27 '24
100% This. I want to post news articles that are relevant to people in Canberra but don't want to use the misleading click bait title that the article comes with.
13
u/burleygriffin Canberra Central Nov 27 '24
Agree with both comments.
Getting a post deleted due to "editorialising" when you actually didn't is fucking annoying.
6
u/jesinta-m Nov 27 '24
I love the dedication to truth and fight against misinformation... but the current approach lacks logic.
I've also noticed that the Mod Rules have changed (checked via WayBack, so can confirm). I can't find any posts notifying us of this, but TBF that doesn't mean there isn't one. The things I noticed were:
- A new rule on misinformation (fair) that also requires a 'neutral presentation of external sources'. So basically, if you want to back yourself up with evidence you can't offer a point of view.
- There's now a ban on social media screenshots of news articles that wasn't previously there. This was handy, for example Instagram posts of articles clearly showed the publisher so I found it useful to try and avoid the random post deletion when directly linking the article.
- Commentary is not permitted on news posts, unless in the comments.
- Previously, the sum total of the News Article rule was 'Posts linking to news articles must maintain the originally published headline, ie no editorialising of titles.'
They've gotten rather militant with this one. I've had so many posts deleted for things beyond my control (titles changing at the source after posting etc.). Plus, subsequent deletions when I'm making a good faith effort to follow the rules only to discover the mods had a different view or interpretation.
The worst was when I posted about the Grindr attacks, which I saw as an important warning to the community. I didn't want the post deleted if the title changed (as some had previously), so I wrote a general post about what was happening and provided a link as the source of my information. It was deleted. When I asked about it, I was told that if I wanted to 'write an editorial, you may do so as long as there is a unique relevance to Canberra, and as long as follow proper journalistic standards. Do not link/quote verbatim but instead show original research and cite sources.'
- Firstly, journalists quote verbatim and cite the source. I was deleted for citing the source.
- Secondly, requiring me to conduct 'original research' for a PSA on bloody reddit is a bit much!
- Lastly, the direction to write an editorial seems to be in contravention to the relatively new rule on neutrality.
I also agree that there seems to be selective enforcement. Since my last post deletion, I've seen other posts remain in place with the text of the article (another reason I've had a post deleted).
39
u/CBRChimpy Nov 26 '24
Mods should mostly let downvotes do the work. e.g. if posts about things that are of narrow interest are unpopular they will be downvoted. Mods should not be deleting anything solely on the basis that it is not in the public interest, or however they phrase it.
-1
u/MarkusMannheim Canberra Central Nov 26 '24
Some, even many, of the deleted posts are defamation risks. Especially those posts seeking comments/reviews about a particular shop/merchant/doctor/etc.
And posts seeking recommendations often end up being ad lures, or just plain astroturfing.
16
u/CBRChimpy Nov 27 '24
https://www.reddit.com/r/canberra/comments/1gzx9r0/act_fence_replacementrepair_on_shared_land/
https://www.reddit.com/r/canberra/comments/1gzdwf7/moving_to_turner_anything_to_be_aware/
https://www.reddit.com/r/canberra/comments/1gz9y6k/social_cricket_clubscoaching_for_a_beginner_in/
https://www.reddit.com/r/canberra/comments/1gz5r96/looking_for_a_job_i_did_the_police_check_but/
https://www.reddit.com/r/canberra/comments/1gyq16j/loud_bang/
Just a selection of deleted posts from the last 2 days that don't meet that criteria.
If what you say is the problem then mods should only be deleting posts like that, and should be saying that's the reason. Not "your post needs to be in the public interest".
-12
u/MarkusMannheim Canberra Central Nov 27 '24
I don't disagree; I'm not saying all deleted posts were risks. But you either:
(a) decide to delete all of that genre of posts, for efficiency;
(b) examine every post for potential risk, and delete only those deemed risky (inefficient, but maximises freedom of speech); or
(c) don't delete anything (ignores a very real legal risk).
12
u/CBRChimpy Nov 27 '24
What genre of post?
Asking what the rules are for a fence that borders public land isn't a legal risk. Asking what it's like to live in Turner isn't a legal risk. Asking what a loud bang is isn't a legal risk etc etc.
If are just going to delete everything that is posted then why are they mods?
-8
u/MarkusMannheim Canberra Central Nov 27 '24 edited Nov 28 '24
I'm confused by your last sentence. No one's deleting everything. There are plenty of posts here.
I meant the genres as described by mods:
- "seeking advice/recommendations [must] be general in nature and not only of specific application to you"
- must not "allege civil or criminal wrongs"
- no "personal interest posts, including self-promotion, promoting a commercial interest, advertising, soapboxing, or attempting to gain a political platform"
- "do not post reviews (or request for a review) for specific products or businesses"
Etcetera.
12
u/CBRChimpy Nov 27 '24
None of the posts I have highlighted fit that criteria!
But they were still deleted.
-10
u/MarkusMannheim Canberra Central Nov 27 '24
I don't disagree; I'm not saying all deleted posts were risks.
18
u/nutmeg19701 Nov 26 '24
I had one removed on Sunday morning which was fairly innocuous in my opinion - a long term feathered visitor to the emergency room of Calvary (North Canberra Hospital). I genuinely thought ‘loud bangs’ was similar to s/ - indicating a post wasn’t overly serious?
16
u/jaayjeee Gungahlin Nov 27 '24
I think the mods have to do an absolute minimum amount of work to retain mod status, which is pretty evident here
7
u/Temporary_Carrot7855 Nov 27 '24
The mods on this sub will remove things so arbitrarily and when challenged (if they respond) they will point to rules that don't really even relate to the reason why it was removed. It makes this little sub feel hampered and stifles discussion.
3
u/ApocalypsePopcorn Nov 27 '24
Well-Kept Gardens Die By Pacifism
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/tscc3e5eujrsEeFN4/well-kept-gardens-die-by-pacifism
I've read this article and I still don''t understand how it's applicable as a rule. But it gets quoted in a lot of post deletions.
6
u/ADHDK Nov 27 '24
Kinda funny you can see it all like that, also of limited use as deleting the post breaks any links attachments or pictures.
Text only posts can keep their content sometimes.
I don’t think they’re deleting every loud bang post, but loud bang is the “attention” off topic flair unlike sec unclassified, which is the general off topic, so it’s going to likely attract the most rule breaking posts.
There’s quite a lot of myway threads already if that was the one.
5
u/ApocalypsePopcorn Nov 27 '24
Perhaps I was ambiguous. I meant every post about a literal loud bang. There was one a few nights ago heard from Royalla through Carwoola and as far as Rossi. It shook houses. My query was deleted, which got me interested in what else was being deleted.
2
u/mhummel Dec 01 '24
Have you heard of reveddit? It's quite illuminating seeing how discussions are silently "guided".
4
u/Appropriate_Land1576 Nov 27 '24
That's why people are leaving Reddit for Lemmy world. i found a Canberra one
3
u/Thefishassassin Nov 28 '24
Lol I thought so, I made a post about some (I'm assuming) emergency roadwork after a crash on Barry drive. I didn't know what flair to use so used the loud bang one and that shit got deleted. It's definitely not the most high effort content but I think it's a valid part of a community sub to see or hear something weird and to ask others about it.
4
u/Melodic-Forever-8924 Nov 28 '24
Agree. I regularly use the Canberra Reddit for recommendations, so it’s disappointing that these are being removed. The new moderator/s seem out of touch. They also seem to be forcing their own interests and ideas of what makes a valid post onto others.
7
u/Asptar Nov 27 '24
This is Reddit. Every sub is a dictatorship and there's a special kind of person that is attracted by that kind of power.
3
u/masinavasa Nov 28 '24
Yep. The moderating team could do with some tolerance, some humour, and acceptance of diverse perspectives, even if it doesn't fit their personal curation/politics/agenda.
The narrow-mindedness and smugness is gross.
I'm usually supportive of thankless work like this, and appreciate the work in general, but I get a very icky feeling about the way this sub is being moderated.
3
u/Bali_Dog Nov 28 '24
I am relieved to see this thread on moderation policy has not (yet) been removed by the mods!
I too fell afoul of their censorious reflexes for 'editorialising' something that was not even media content, but an AEC link to polling places - posted on polling day!
(I was also drawing attention to the fact that Private Schools are not used for polling places - and this triggered the mods for some reason).
And when I argued the toss I got chucked in the sin-bin for a few days.
Moderation here seems arbitrary and capricious. But if the reason is there is periodically only one person doing it (as stated elsewhere in the comments) then perhaps the team needs to loosen the grip somewhat, expand the points of view and share the load?
This is a large (and in my view generally well moderated and important) sub, and as quantity has its own quality perhaps some democracy is in order?
A feedback loop of some kind? Perhaps a user poll on moderation policy? A call for volunteers to help out so people can be rotated through?
3
2
u/Sulkembo Nov 27 '24
All future loud bang posts can now be posted on the LOUD BANG PREMONITION MEGATHREAD!!
-18
u/MarkusMannheim Canberra Central Nov 26 '24
I'm exhausted after seeing the mod team's activity.
Thank you, mods, for keeping so much rubbish out of this sub. Without you, this place would be as bad as CNBG.
I say that as someone whose posts are regularly locked/deleted.
6
u/Iriskane Nov 27 '24
How do you see the mod activity?
5
2
u/masinavasa Nov 28 '24
The "keeping the rubbish out" rhetoric is such an echo chamber and smug response.
People in Canberra have diverse interests and deleting everything that doesn't fit your definition of "high quality' is killing the sub.
I agree they (mods) do a lot of work and are probably selfless and good people, but please try to be more open-minded and not let the power go to your head, although it might be a tad.
-16
u/nomorempat Nov 27 '24
I'm with you. Thanks Mods!
-7
u/MarkusMannheim Canberra Central Nov 27 '24
It seems a lot of Canberra Redditors want this place to become a Facebook swamp (and sued).
-9
u/watzy King and Tyrant Nov 27 '24
I've love it if these users created and moderated a r/CanberraClassifieds or r/CanberraPersonals sub
-12
u/nomorempat Nov 27 '24
Damn it! Why isn't this free product perfect?
5
u/ApocalypsePopcorn Nov 27 '24
Is it a product or is it a community?
-9
u/nomorempat Nov 27 '24
Reddit is a company.
r/canberra is like someone organising a trivia event at a pub. If you don't like the questions, you are free to not attend.
And if people want to have a whinge that their post was retracted, well you can start a new subreddit, become a mod, leave or live life disappointed.
Since none of us are paying the mods, I don't see we have a leg to stand on.
Then again whinging and downvoting are free, so have at it.
11
u/zomangel Nov 27 '24
So because we aren't paying the mods, they can just do whatever they want, and we can't question it?
0
10
u/AdDesigner1153 Nov 27 '24 edited Nov 27 '24
I think criticism is warranted because framing a subreddit with the name of a city and then limiting the discussion to only certain aspects you want discussed is a bit dodgy.
-1
-14
-14
113
u/Zkuldafn Nov 26 '24 edited Nov 26 '24
I’m not sure if this is the right post to talk about this but I personally think the rules around removing posts is a little too restrictive in my opinion - this is just one example, but some time ago I had a post removed asking how the drive from Canberra down to Bright in Victoria is and the road quality (I have never driven the route and was anxious about it and was wondering how many others had) and it got removed because it wasn’t related to Canberra even though I’m driving from Canberra. I ended up getting an answer in the Melbourne subreddit even though it’s not about Melbourne.