Genuine question from a moderator.

I've only just realised that banning someone from a public subreddit doesn't actually remove their access to the community. They can still view the subreddit and its content.

So... what exactly is the point of calling it a ban?

If a moderator decides that an account should no longer be part of their community, particularly because of harassment, disruption or repeated bad faith behaviour, there should at least be an option to properly exclude that account from the community.

I'm not saying every ban needs to work this way.

Give moderators two options:

Participation ban, can't post or comment.

Community ban, can't access the community while logged into that account.

Because right now, "you're banned from this community, but you're welcome to keep looking through the window" is a very strange definition of banned.

Not everyone wants to lose karma for the stupidest things, after all.

The title is fairly self-explanatory, but I have a few gripes with the current contribution tag system. When I say gripes, I mean that lightly. This is just Reddit. But still, I see the system as far from optimal for what it tries to represent.

Simply put, I think contribution tags, both post- and comment-related, would be far more meaningful and indicative of quality if they rolled over into an all-time count.

There are, of course, downsides to this directly:

- For example, if the top contribution (almost always a post) in a subreddit gains tens or even hundreds of thousands of upvotes... that person is virtually guaranteed to have a secured spot at the top for the entirety of that subreddit's existence, even if they fall off the face of the earth the next week. I don't think a "hall of fame" effect is the intended goal (although it would still be more meaningful than what we have now).

- It also makes it significantly more difficult for others to push past the top contribution threshold.

However, I don't think starting on a clean slate every month is the best alternative. After all, a bigger threshold lends more gravity and meaning to the tag itself.

Someone who contributes every single month has to start over on the 1st of the new month, no matter how great their contributions have been. In a way, it disregards an offshoot of the principle that the best predictor of the future is the past. Contributors who have shown over months or years to retain their place among the top signify that they are likely to produce quality posts/comments going forward as well, and the tag tells readers, "Hey, the community favors what this person says; maybe I should pay greater heed to it."

Unfortunately, that effect is lost when contribution does not roll over, and the tally starts over at the beginning of the new month. There is essentially no more historical "lore" (for lack of a better word) or "pull" to the user that signifies I should listen to them, and they become another voice in the crowd.

Giving it more thought, I think a roll-over all-time contribution isn't the best solution either. There are a number of ways to identify top contributors. For example:

Specifically for Top Commenter: given based on % total share of net upvotes WITHIN a given thread, across all threads the user has ever commented on, and then normalized based on thread size or traction (i.e., a top comment with 2 upvotes because the original post got no traction doesn't weigh much against a comment with 2,000 upvotes in a top post). So it goes from a ranked list of who got the most upvotes this month to ranking based on all-time share of thread impact.

Something like: Contribution Reputation = normalized thread impact x consistency x breadth x engagement quality x time weight

Suppose I leave a comment that receives 2,000 net upvotes in a thread where the next-highest comments have 1,700, 900, and 600. That says considerably more than receiving 2,000 upvotes in a gigantic thread where twenty comments received 10,000+. You could percentile-rank the comment within its own thread, account for total thread engagement, and then aggregate those percentiles across someone's commenting history. Suddenly, you are measuring something much closer to repeated relative performance rather than raw exposure.

Of course, this issue is neither here nor there. If the tag is just for vanity, then none of this matters. But it's something I've been thinking about as someone who is routinely a top contributor in multiple communities. Perhaps I'm subconsciously biased, and this is just some form of prideful "status protection" (lol, imagine that, protecting my Reddit status). Anywho, what are your thoughts?

Could bring more revenue, solve the bot problem, and keep Reddit Reddit. What do you guys think about the idea?

Many other apps do this now, and, I don’t know, forcing all users to use ai is just… it doesn’t feel like Reddit?

Reddit is usually the place I go when I want a human perspective, like an independent, actual person.

Now I have Reddit bot, robo-splaining every little search query such as:

“Turn off Ai on Reddit”

“Here’s what users are saying on Reddit 😀:

😀 One Reddit user says “I f***ing hate Ai, how do I turn ts off”
😀 While another says, “Deal with it bro, AI is taking over the world and there is NOTHING you can do about it!”
😀Hope that helps!”

Sometimes a thread can devolves or get thrown off topic due to uncalled for comments, etc. Giving an OP the option to softvdelete or hide comments on their own post could help them maintain their thread's intended tone.

​As it would be a soft delete, moderators and admins could still view and restore hidden comments if necessary.

This could help give posters more control over their posts while helping lessen the workload for subreddit mods.

Thank you for your time.

I’m still fairly new to Reddit and I’m really enjoying the platform, but one thing I find confusing is knowing whether I’m actually eligible to post or comment somewhere

Sometimes I write a whole post and only find out when I try to submit it that I don't meet one of the requirements

My idea is for Reddit to show this information before you start writing. Maybe Reddit could have a small eligibility indicator that checks your account against the requirements for the community you're viewing.

Something simple like:

🟢 You meet the requirements

🟡 You’re missing 1 requirement

🔴 You’re not eligible yet

It doesn't necessarily have to show the exact karma requirement if Reddit doesn't want to reveal that. Even something like “You meet 3 out of 4 requirements” and telling you what's missing would be helpful

I know Reddit already does some eligibility checks when you try to post, but having that information beforehand would save a lot of wasted time, especially for newer users.

I was wondering if other people would find this useful too

The upvote/downvote button is for sorting out what content is good/relevant and what content is bad/irrelevant. If a user is voting on a poll, their interaction indicates that the content is good/relevant. If it were bad/irrelevant, one wouldn't be interacting with the poll in the first place.

Preamble:

We already do this with OPs, so why not also with comments?

Reddit has long passed the point where downvoting is a metric of useful information because people regularly abuse the feature to register their disapproval of grammar, spelling, punctuation, revenge, or even they just don't like the choice of words used. It's being used not as it was originally intended to register one disagrees with the content posted, rather now as a common means to punish people. And when people start downvoting, others pile on just because other people are downvoting them too, it's nearly an automatic reaction that, again, is not useful. So people get downvoted into oblivion but often there's no clear indication why so there's no benefit, it doesn't communicate anything useful. And for a lot of people this is very discouraging, and to a limited few that truly place personal value on these votes it can be devastating.

-----

Now, don't get me wrong. I'm not saying downvoting isn't useful or that it should be eliminated altogether. But allowing people's comments to get downvoted into the negative by dozens or hundreds is counterproductive, can be hurtful, and for a select few it can be devastating to the point of self-harm, or at the very least deleting their comment(s). Which removes context and pretty much destroys the conversation, wastes everyone's time and is destructive to communities and idea generation. Knowing this will happen effects everyone and how much they choose to participate, how much time they invest in their responses. Why even waste your time, right?

Other communities, like Youtube, have entirely nerfed the downvote or in some areas, like reels, eliminated it entirely. But I'm not convinced eliminating it entirely is useful either.

So what if, instead, the reddit system is set up similar to OP voting, where it goes no lower than 1. Because presumably you've at least upvoted your own post. Just like Youtube, the system will still register your downvote and every time you come across that comment your downvote is still visible to you it just can't bring the vote for any comment lower than 1. People's comments resting at 1 easily communicates the group isn't accepting of whatever they've posted, and that should be quite sufficient. We don't need to punish people further.

The one thing this will accomplish is to help remove a lot of the aggression, unnecessary bickering, and otherwise desperate interactions. It will temper conversations so not quite so much is at stake and people will be more inclined toward interacting rather than reacting and revenge seeking. This will also help to calm the waters for Moderators and Admins and make their jobs a little less miserable.

The whole place would a little less angry, and I'm sure we can all agree we could use a little bit more of that.

❤️

Here’s your user story for the next PI Planning Event: as a Reddit user, I need to be able to see whatever it is that I wrote that broke a rule, so that I can NOT DO IT ANYMORE and be a good community member.

I get that I can come off salty sometimes. But I’m not a remotely violent woman and I had a post removed for “advocating violence or harm” (I’m pretty sure I said something along the lines of that I hoped Father Time or unhealthy habits did their job; I doubt I’ve never ever advocated for anyone to actually inflict violent harm on any specific person, nor would I.)

I am FINE with Reddit removing the comment. Hell, I’m fine with them chiding me about it even if i wouldn’t agree! But IN MY REPLY to their nastygram I specifically ASKED if they could at least TELL ME WHAT IT IS I SAID THAT BROKE THE RULES, because I literally can’t see it anymore, and I guess maybe I’m a weirdo but I don’t have a perfect memory of every single word of every comment I write here.

My ONLY message from reddit was basically just a regurgitation of the same thing, with an admonishment to review the rules again. FINE. But if I don’t even REMEMBER WHAT I WROTE, how in the hell am i supposed to know if i typo’d something, worded something inadvertently horribly by accident, or legitimately was just breaking a rule that i should be more mindful of going forward? WHY would they write back to be like “yeah we took a look and saw the comment again and you were wrong; the end” — FINE! I am fully willing to accept that I WAS wrong, in whatever way! But if I don’t even know what it is that I wrote, how am I supposed to know which PART of my comment (I honestly do not even remember if this was a single sentence or a novel of a comment) was where I screwed up. Maybe I was being flippant and a joke didn’t land; maybe I posted in the wrong sub and thought I was replying about something else, maybe I had a mini-stroke and don’t remember posting on a given thread.

I don’t understand why if an admin removes a comment the OP can’t at least still SEE it. Apparently they claim THEY can still see and review it. I don’t wanna be a shitty community member! I wasn’t TRYING to be! Instead I just got basically the same message followed by “also if you do this again you’ll be even more on the Bad Kid List”, like, okay? Thanks for the clarity?

• Allow users to post photos, videos, and GIFs in comments when an NSFW community enables media in comments.
• Allow NSFW communities to upload and post videos directly.
• Allow NSFW communities to crosspost videos from other NSFW communities.

This is just a button to show that you respectfully disagree with a person. This makes it so you don’t have to comment about that and you don’t have to make people lose karma

Medical information is highly triggering to many people. I see you have chosen to hide pregnancy ads by default unless someone turns them on, for example. I believe ALL medical ads should be off by default. I work for a medical company and have extreme health anxiety. I don't know if it's my job or what but a huge portion of my ads are medical ads for things like cancer drugs. I'm desperate to stop seeing them and may have to quit using Reddit with no way to turn them off. I have personalized ads turned off.

I have been choosing to hide them every time they come up but I just got another one today for a rare cancer drug and it sends me into a spiral.

Please consider either adding medical ads to the "must turn on" section with the likes of pregnancy and gambling, OR give us better control overall on the types of ads we want to see. Please.