3.5 KiB
[META] Concrete repost guidelines?
-
Author: u/ToaKraka https://i.imgur.com/OQGHleQ.png*
-
URL: https://www.reddit.com/r/rational/comments/3syq17/meta_concrete_repost_guidelines/
-
Score: 3
-
Created: 2015-11-16T01:15:40
Post:
A few hours ago, I was going to post this link--but a quick search revealed that it had already been posted. However, that post was made over a year and a half ago--and I, at least, hadn't yet discovered this site at that time.
According to the sidebar, "occasional reposting" is encouraged--but there aren't any firm guidelines. Maybe the reposting of a link could be allowed if the number of subscribers to r/rational has increased by a factor of 2 (or 1.5, 1.33, etc.) since the previous posting, so the information will be fresh in the eyes of one-half (or one-third, one-quarter, etc.) of all subscribers... (Currently, the factor-of-two criterion would include everything posted before mid-December of last year.)
Comments:
u/alexanderwales [+13] Time flies like an arrow (19 minutes later)
I doubt we're ever going to give firm reposting guidelines. The only time I have ever removed reposts is if they're so close that they're on the front page at the same time (in other words, a result of someone not checking whether the thing was already up somewhere). The voting system can moderate everything else.
Part of the reason that I wouldn't want to give concrete guidelines is that people have different reasons for reposting things. Sometimes you'd want to repost because it's suddenly relevant again, or other times because you just recently read it and want to have some discussion.
The other mods can chime in, but I'm in favor of leaving it laissez faire.
u/PeridexisErrant [+12] put aside fear for courage, and death for life (2 hours later)
Yep. /r/rational is still small enough for light-touch moderation. Basically, just use your own judgement and let the voting sort it out.
u/Transfuturist [+2] Carthago delenda est. (23 minutes later)
Pegging a rule to the rate of growth is a bad idea. I believe it's better to keep reposting guidelines vague than to tie it to something unpredictable like that. The reasonableness of a repost does not change with the total population of a sub. Even if all the same people are here a year from now, it is a good idea to allow rehashing old content, because people miss posts, ignore or disregard their presentation, or simply forget about them or their names and sources. People can come at things from different perspectives across long periods of time, because what they know and feel has changed. And then there are whatever viewers of this sub are there without subscribing, either regularly because they don't have an account or don't feel like subscribing, or incidental. To an extent, all activity is good activity. Discussion can bring up new points. The total subscriber count is not representative of new subscribers, either, as people are able to leave.
u/xamueljones [+1] My arch-enemy is entropy (an hour later)
I don't usually do repostings myself, but the rare few times that I have done so, I usually checked to see if it had been posted within the last six months.