Adjusting the rules to prevent low effort/information spam
Adjusting the rules to prevent low effort/information spam
Hey fellow libertarians,
I'm writing this post because I really got annoyed by the recent increase of low effort and often also low information posts shared in this community. When I tried formulating the rules when creating this community, my main focus was to create a culture of civil and constructive discussion.
There are a lot of possible ways to contribute to this goal and I don't want to exclude any type of content in any way. But to prevent meaningless spam, I thought about adjusting the 3d rule to better align with the aforementioned goals.
Lemmy offers the great opportunity to share an image or a link together with some text to explain it. Based on this, I'd add something like: "the context and relevance of otherwise textless or shared content should be explained in words by it's contributor." or "the information of shared/remote types of content should be evident from the post itself without the need of visiting the source." Also, we could start requiring a TLDR for shared news posts.
What do you guys think?
You're viewing a single thread.
Bad idea. While there is a place for longer-form posts, news articles are valuable as well. Articles can inspire good discussion, just like longer posts can. Fewer people have time to write longer posts, and this community was quite inactive until people started posting news articles.
I don't want to prohibit anything. Just that the person who shares a link or other remote content adds one or two sentences about what is going on, why they find it relevant to share or a personal statement. Anything that could quickly explain the content and why it was shared.
Implementing these rules would kill any chance at an active community. Things are already slow here, and the articles have actually spurred some activity. If you prefer no community to a community that doesn’t 100% follow your preferred rules, then go ahead with the plan. This post just sounds like a moderator trying to find an excuse for existence. Getting annoyed by articles that are a common prompt for discussion on many platforms and calling article posts “meaningless spam” is ridiculous.
Hey man, wanna stay calm? No point calling people names. I wanted to ask you guys how you see it. This is your opinion and I accept it. But don't think that it's more worth than any other persons opinion.
I just wanted to make it easier for people to get the information as I personally hate it getting redirected to another website which may be paywalled or have annoying ads or anything like that just to get some little information.
I would also disagree about the earlier state of this community as it did not have as many posts but the overall discussions were quite more active than they are now.
I’m perfectly calm and at no point have I engaged in name calling. As for the redirects, nobody is required to take those. Those who want to engage in the discussion more may choose to follow the link, and others will not. No one- or two-sentence description will replace reading the full article. I can’t understand how you think the prior state of the community is superior. Most posts here don’t get more than a handful of comments, be it an external article or an essay written here.