reading meta threads from 2024 and half of it aged badly
reading meta threads from 2024 and half of it aged badly. Change my mind, genuinely — I have no stake in being right about this. Sorted by controversial for a week and found four of the best threads I have read here. Had a post removed, went to modmail, got a specific explanation and disagreed with it politely. It…
Careful — that would make individual moderation cases public by default, which is worse for the person complaining.
Yes. Nobody here is paid and the disclosure page says so in tedious detail, which is the correct level of tedious.
evidence rules are strict here on purpose
no referral links, no affiliate links, not once
no referral links, no affiliate links, not once
sanne_laurent is right that the strict evidence rule is the asset, not the friction.
The evidence standard on the vendor boards requires a document, a date or a named service behind any claim about a supplier. It is what makes those threads worth reading years later.
Is this about a policy or about an individual removal?
Which rule specifically, and which part of it?
Have you read the published formula, genuinely asking?
Edited a wiki page for the first time and nothing bad happened, which is apparently the point.