Reddit idea

Scott Long71 said:I run this site as a friendly, non-commercial forum—it’s basically just a small litmus test for the competition.

Thanks for clarifying. I suppose we won't have to spend our time explaining to certain people that this isn't some radical underground cell dedicated solely to tearing down Reddit.

So, we have a new supermoderator superstar 🙂 — Nice...

Admin status immediately. No jokes.

All these changes—let's call them the "humanization" of Reddit, if we're being vague—that are being announced and attempted right now? They simply require at least one drastic, gutsy staffing move that doesn't involve just shuffling the same old deck chairs.

Appointing someone as an admin who isn't "burdened by past grudges," someone without "baggage," someone fundamentally different—finally, someone who managed to "pacify" the President in just three days through sheer, basic decency and humanity—that would actually be a real leap forward and a sign that they are "being serious."

Anything else just feels like trying to teach old dogs new tricks.

I’m being dead serious here. Look, Daniel Ward87 is the new admin now, which means we're looking at a major shift in how things run. But honestly, will that be "serious enough" for everyone? Probably not. I can already see it: one group will complain they need even more admins, another will demand four new moderators just to stay trendy, and some other crowd will probably scream to fire the entire board. Everyone thinks they have a valid point from where they're sitting, I guess.

Brandon Castillo4 said:He’s being serious—besides, Daniel Ward87 is the new admin now...

I haven't even posted on Politics, nor have I really read it—so, frankly, I don't know the man at all.

However, this isn't actually about whether he is one way or another; without any pretensions or illusions regarding some sort of personnel reshuffling, what I am writing here is more of a "systemic observation." All these grand oaths about moving toward "new directions" and "new winds" remain incredibly shaky when they are being implemented by the exact same people who dominated the old directions and the old winds (for instance—if I may—there is that pervasive sense of edge where everyone continues to "thank" people for their intellect, predicting their futures in various think tanks and such, in a classic old-school President style—though I will try to be polite so no one can claim I'm mocking anyone or being snarky).

The whole narrative would gain a significant amount of credibility if it were backed up by an action like appointing someone who truly embodies those very values—the ones everyone (well, for some, it must be phrased as "...the ones everyone suddenly) swears by—to the very top of this supposedly "new direction" pyramid (and I don't mean the mods).

But then again, it's none of my business.

Nicholas King said:I haven't even posted on Politics, let alone read it—so I don't really know the guy.

That said, it isn't about whether he’s a good or bad person; without any delusions about trying to fix specific people, my take is more about "observing the system." All these big promises about "new directions" and "fresh starts" feel pretty shaky when they're being driven by the exact same crowd that dominated the old ways. It’s like watching a tech giant claim they’ve revolutionized everything while the same old executives are just moving from one corner office to another, getting thanked for their genius and promised seats at various think tanks—it's classic old-school President behavior. I’ll try to be polite so no one can say I’m just trolling or being a jerk.

The whole narrative would carry way more weight if they actually put someone at the top of this "new direction" pyramid who actually embodies those values—someone who represents what everyone suddenly claims to care about. Right now, the leadership doesn't reflect that.

But hey, it's your funeral.

I mostly agree with you, but (there's always a "but," right?) I think you're missing the mark here.

From what I gather, you're pushing for a total overhaul—bringing in a completely fresh crew with zero baggage. That’s a fair idea, but real change doesn't happen overnight. Plus, it doesn't mean we should tear everything down; you only fix what’s actually broken. There are parts of Reddit that work perfectly fine and have been working for ages, so why mess with them?

Also, if we're talking about changes, it helps to be specific—whether it's a particular rule or actual people (like moderators or admins). You mentioned you don't read Politics, so you don't know me or the other guy. But I’d point out one big issue: a lot of people complain about how mods or admins act without actually looking into the root cause. I totally agree that everyone needs to stay respectful, but rarely does anyone stop to look at *who* is complaining, why they're doing it, or how they're going about it.

Systemic change always starts with small steps, and it's the same thing here. Your core idea is solid, but the method stays the same. Let's get specific—pick one rule, one person, one thing.

Daniel Ward87

Daniel Ward87 said:I am totally with you on the idea that we’ve gotta keep things polite, but honestly—hardly anyone ever actually stops to look at who these people complaining actually are, why they’re even making a fuss, or how they're going about it.

Man, I really, truly hope this doesn't turn into just another one of those endless threads where we just sit around making a giant list of every mistake and bad call made. We have plenty of those already, and if anyone actually cares, they can go find them whenever they want. Look, I'm all for pointing out mistakes when they happen, but I'm really dreading another useless "list of grievances" that doesn't actually accomplish anything.

As for being polite—listen, politeness isn't just about the way you phrase things. It's not just about writing a pretty, well-structured sentence. There’s a whole layer of respecting the person you're talking to involved too. But hey, whatever, moving on.

And regarding the people doing the complaining? They're all over the map. Smart, dumb, polite, rude, annoying, exhausting... honestly, they're all types. But just because someone else decides to jump off a cliff doesn't mean everyone else should follow suit. Someone else being rude is never an excuse for you to be rude back.

Let's get specific about what needs changing—let's start with a single PDF, a certain person, or whatever works.

Alright.
I'm all for making Brandon Castillo4 an admin. I don't think that changes the stuff that's been working great on this Reddit, and that's definitely staying put. Someone once said that if the fish stinks, it starts at the head. I'm pretty sure that holds true even when the fish is fresh.

Look, we’re trying, but you can’t please everyone. Like I said before, we’re all eventually going to move on anyway—it doesn't benefit me or anyone else personally, because none of us are going to be in fashion forever, and I certainly won't be.

I think implementing these changes is enough for now, because the only real boss of this Reddit is Anderson, as the owner. Based on your line of thinking, someone could argue that there will never be any real change until Anderson sells the site. And following your logic, you might actually have a point. 🤷

Let's try looking at it this way. I get that it isn't perfect, but maybe people are asking a little too much from the whole situation—both from the platform and from certain users. I'm not trying to blindly defend the edge, but have you seen what people are writing to him? If we lean too hard on the tools, it's bad because we're overmoderating; if you snap back at someone, you're being unpleasant, and that's considered arrogance (and I agree with both points, honestly). Now, even just having a bit of a cynical attitude gets you criticized, and once again, it's a lose-lose.

In my opinion, the level of communication is way better than it was previously (over the last few months, at least, not necessarily right this second). You can't expect a guy to call out the edge on seventeen different things and then have him respond with the most chill vibe ever. It doesn't always work like that. We all have our limits. I agree there shouldn't be any arrogance, but I think things are improving. We aren't machines. I’m primarily a user here myself, and I come here to relax and mess around, not to act like a bureaucrat or a clerk—and being a moderator was never meant to be exclusively that, either.

There will always be something to complain about. It's fine to say what you think, but it's impossible to satisfy every single demand. Besides, nobody is making any blood oaths here. I do this out of pure enthusiasm. I've done good things and bad things, but it's not like this is a position I have to cling to blindly just so someone doesn't hold me to some "you swore an oath" standard tomorrow.

I didn't swear an oath to anything. I just stated how I see things. Regarding everything, I'm going to give my all to help the team pull off this turnaround. I started with myself and my own sub-sections, my own approach, I publicly apologized for my mistakes, I made myself more available to the users, and I said that after eight years of moderating, I'm stepping down because it's time. I’ll power through this remaining period with enthusiasm, and then I'm hanging up the cleats for good. So from my perspective—as someone who will be a (super)mod for about another year and then just a regular user—my priority is simply making sure the site is as good as possible.

Kate Thompson67 said:I really hope this doesn't turn into just another thread where we sit around making a laundry list of every mistake and bad call. We’ve got plenty of those already, and anyone looking for them can find them easily enough. I'm all for pointing out when things go wrong, but I'd rather avoid another useless list that doesn't actually accomplish anything.

Being polite isn't just about how you phrase things or using fancy vocabulary. It’s really about showing some actual respect to the person you're talking to. But hey, that's just my two cents.

When it comes to the people complaining, it’s a mixed bag. You've got the smart ones, the idiots, the polite folks, and the total jerks—it’s anyone and everyone. But just because someone decides to jump off a ten-story building doesn't mean everyone else has to follow suit. Someone else being a jerk isn't an excuse for you to act like one, too.

Nah, I wasn't even trying to... I can't quite make sense of that one. Could you clarify what you mean? He's talking about the core concept here. If we're really going to start dissecting this, we should probably just open a dedicated thread for it.
In my eyes, the whole point of a Reddit thread is to actually talk and swap ideas. There’s definitely a certain way people should debate and respect different views, but you’re right—we shouldn't let this drag on forever. I just wanted to point out that the massive shifts Nicholas King is suggesting aren't going to happen overnight; big changes always start with small steps. That doesn't mean people can't discuss them, but in my opinion, we should probably get into the nitty-gritty details. Just talking in broad generalities doesn't get us anywhere if we don't dive deeper. I'm not saying that wasn't the intention, but from experience, I know how great ideas can fall apart simply because they lacked a concrete plan.

Look, I agree that someone else being a jerk isn't an excuse to be one yourself. But as a former moderator for the Politics section, I can tell you that Reddit is just like real life—it’s not always easy to stay classy when someone is constantly coming at you sideways. Sure, it would be great to just walk away and ignore the noise, but sometimes that's just not how it works. I'm not making excuses for anyone, but let's be real: hardly anyone ever stops to look at the context or asks why someone is acting out in the first place. If the whole point of this site is to have decent discussions, then we actually need to build a culture of conversation. That requires effort from both sides, and honestly, that's usually where it falls apart.

Kate Thompson67 said:Got it. Ready to go.
I’m all for making Brandon Castillo4 an admin. It won't mess with the good vibes we already have here, and that's what matters most. Someone once said a bad fish starts at the head—I think that applies even when things seem fine on the surface.

Nobody said Nice wouldn't end up as an admin. Honestly, seeing the President step up like that is the perfect warmup for running a forum like this, and I'm betting it won't be long before Nice takes over the reins.

Daniel Ward87 said:The way I’m reading you, it sounds like you’re pushing for some kind of radical overhaul of everything...

You completely misread me. 🙂

I am not advocating for a "radical change to everything"—not even slightly. Regarding the mention of the "super-moderator star," I was merely attempting to explain how—and why—granting an "admin star" would actually reinforce the very things being announced verbally.

Let’s get specific about this change; let's start with a single PDF, a person, or whatever else.

I couldn't have been more specific if I tried. 🙂

Nice. Admin. That’s all there is to it. 😁.

Nicholas King said:You totally missed my point. 🙂

I’m not calling for some "total overhaul of the system"—when I brought up that "super-mod star," I was just trying to show how giving someone an "admin star" would actually back up all the big promises being made.

It couldn't be clearer than that. 🙂

Nice. Admin. Period. 😁.

My bad for the misunderstanding.

Personally, I don't have any issue with making Nice an admin right this second.

But, having served as a moderator for American politics, I think jumping straight to admin might be a mistake for her right now. It's not about whether she can handle it—she definitely can—it's more about the experience. It's like climbing a ladder; it's usually better to work through those different levels of moderation and handling various user types before stepping up to the top-tier admin level.

Daniel Ward87

Brandon Castillo4 said:Someone following your line of reasoning might argue that we’re never going to see any real, substantive change as long as Anderson holds onto the keys to this Reddit community. And, if I’m being honest—following your logic—they might actually have a point. 🤷

This is essentially just a substitution of premises.

We aren't even talking about some vague set of "real changes" that just dropped out of thin air without any clear intention or definition—no, we are talking about the specific shifts that have been announced and demanded by the owner of this Reddit thread himself. Therefore, I suppose any opinion or suggestion offered here shouldn't be wasting time debating whether these changes make sense or are completely pointless; instead, the focus really ought to be on the best way to handle the actual "operationalization" of these specific mandates.

I suppose a person could just as easily have demanded an entirely different set of changes—in which case, the whole operational side of things would have had to shift its priorities quite drastically.

I don't want to deal with replying to every single comment individually—so I’ll just say it once more: I am repeating that... No. I honestly believe that in situations like this, we need some radical head-hunting—not that I’m suggesting anyone should dance on graves, mind you, but someone has to take the fall.

Nicholas King said:This is just swapping out the premise.

We aren't talking about some hypothetical "real changes" handed down from on high. We’re talking about the specific shifts that the owner of this forum actually announced and demanded. Because of that, any opinion or suggestion shouldn't be wasting time debating whether these changes make sense or not—it should be focused entirely on the best way to actually make them work.

The guy could have just as easily demanded a completely different set of changes, and if he had, our priorities for implementation would look totally different.

And just to address your point separately: I'm telling you again, I don't think we need a radical purge here, nor do I think we should be dancing on people's graves.

No, swapping the premise would be if I suggested that *you* were the one who said that. This is just using context as an example, following up on your idea about trying to teach old dogs new tricks. For instance, you might think it's enough for Nica admin to happen, or for Tyndall to step down, or for Anderlon to move on.

You're never going to please everyone. As long as the direction is positive, most things will sort themselves out as we go. Even operational moves like making Nica admin—if that becomes necessary, if Nica wants it, and if Anderlon decides it's the way to go.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying your logic is flawed, I'm just saying you shouldn't take this "all or nothing" approach. Every idea has merit, but how things actually play out is ultimately up to Anderlon.