Mod edit

Why the sudden edits? What was the actual point of changing this post—without a single note or any indication of what content was supposedly removed? 😕

http://www.reddit.com/showpost.php?p=2...&postcount=441

There’s private messaging for a reason, and there are bans if someone actually violates the Terms of Service—so what exactly is this supposed to be?

Sometimes an edit is totally harmless—like just fixing a typo in a quote or something... but either way, I really feel like there should be some kind of explanation provided...

feralpilot0 said:Why do people go back and edit their posts after they've already been published?I mean, what was actually the point of editing this post? There wasn't even a note left behind, nothing at all... no explanation about what specific content supposedly needed to be taken out. 😕

I’ve been thinking about this quite a bit lately. It feels like we’re all just circling the same drain, trying to make sense of things that don't really add up. I know I'm probably overthinking it—maybe even a little too much—but there's something about how everyone reacts to these shifts in policy that feels off. It’s like we're all following some unwritten rule instead of actually looking at the facts. I saw what shadowtrucker was saying earlier, and honestly, part of me agrees. It’s easy to get caught up in the noise on Reddit, but if you actually sit back and look at the data from the Pew Research Center, the reality is much more complicated than the arguments we see online. We tend to jump to conclusions way too fast. Anyway, I don't mean to sound like a buzzkill. I just feel like we need to be a bit more careful with how we judge these situations. It's easy to be loud, but it's harder to be right.

There's a private message system, and there are bans if you break the Terms of Service, so what exactly is this supposed to be?

I'm glad you decided to ask that. 🙂 I've actually experienced that myself, and it was from the exact same moderator.
Just a quick follow-up and an edit here—I realized I already mentioned the FBI earlier regarding that specific post they were involved in.
Just a series of ugly insinuations and insults. That’s what I read. Then, a few moments later, everything is suddenly "edited." They claim what I said wasn't true, that I'm making things up, and then they throw in all this nonsense about the server and whatever else. 🙂
Since the "restructuring" happened almost instantly, there was obviously no way to pinpoint exactly when the change took place. But hey, no matter. I guess I’m just the one to blame for supposedly harassing the fashion industry. 🤦
I'm just bummed I didn't grab a copy-paste of that controversial post. I was typing on a different thread, and by the time I came back here to find it, the original version was already gone. 😁

Man, that’s really something. 🙂

👋

Eve, the same thing happened to me around here!
The post hasn't changed at all...

WTF?

Maybe the mods just misclicked—it happens—and now they can't exactly undo it? It’s not even that hard, you just hit the wrong button 🤷

And honestly, feralpilot0, maybe it really was just a fixed quote... those things slip through all the time without us even realizing 🤷

Rachel Brooks63 said:Maybe the mods just misclicked—is there even a way to undo that once it's done? It’s not exactly rocket science to hit the wrong button, right? 🤷

And you, feralpilot0—maybe it really is just a corrected quote that we all overlook without realizing it? 🤷

No, it’s not. They literally edited the opening sentence, which originally read "where the focus shifts from what matters to actual trolling."

Rachel Brooks63 said:Maybe the mods just misclicked, and now there's no way for them to undo it? It isn't exactly rocket science; you just hit the wrong button 🤷

Look, sure, you might accidentally hit edit, but for heaven's sake, there is always a cancel option available right then and there, so you aren't exactly leaving permanent marks behind... 😉

feralpilot0 said:Why do people go back and edit their posts like this? What was even the point of changing this specific one without leaving a note or any indication that anything was actually removed? 😕

I suppose there might be some truth to what shadowtrucker was saying earlier, though I’m not entirely certain. It feels like we're all just circling the same drain, isn't it? I guess if you look at the data from the Pew Research Center, you could argue that the general sentiment is shifting, but even then, it's hard to say anything for sure without more context. Maybe it's just my perspective, but it seems like people are becoming increasingly disillusioned with how things are handled around here. I don't know. It's all very speculative, I suppose.

There's a private message system and we have bans if people violate the Terms of Service, so I'm not quite sure what this is supposed to be.

feralpilot0,
If that's the case, then why does this specific part of the Terms of Service even exist?
I suppose there's some merit to what shadowtrucker was saying earlier, though I find myself somewhat skeptical about the overall direction this conversation is taking. It seems like everyone on Reddit has an opinion on how things should be run, even if those opinions aren't particularly grounded in reality. I guess we'll just have to wait and see how it all unfolds.

Desiree The user said:Editorial opportunities on Reddit.
Reddit is privately owned by the Pew Research Center.
Most of the editorial staff on Reddit are just volunteers who were selected to handle that "job."

They have the ability to:
* Changing the content of posts.
Changing thread titles.
Deleting posts or entire threads.
Moving posts/threads.
...locking threads...

I am asking you quite seriously here: why do you believe a moderator shouldn't be allowed to edit a post? If the rule explicitly says they can only delete it or issue a warning, then that's what they should do. Are you actually suggesting we strike that part from the Terms of Service entirely? Regards.

Susan Brooks83 said:I'm glad you decided to bring that up. 🙂 I've actually experienced that firsthand from the same moderator.
Just to clarify, I already mentioned the FBI regarding that specific post—the one filled with those nasty insinuations and insults. I read it exactly as it was written, but then, just moments later, it had been "edited." Now they’re claiming what I said isn't true, insisting nothing was changed and accusing me of making things up, on top of all the other nonsense about the server and whatnot.

🙂

Would the esteemed lady of this Reddit thread be so kind as to provide the readers with a link?
As confirmation of what I just quoted?

Susan Brooks83 said:Since the "overhaul" happened essentially overnight, I suppose it wasn't exactly obvious when the shift occurred. But regardless, the important thing is that I was accused of persecuting the mods. 🤦 I'm just disappointed I didn't manage to copy and paste that controversial post. I had been typing on a different thread, and by the time I made my way back to this one, it wasn't exactly in its original form anymore. 😁

If you wouldn't mind providing a link to this as well... just so we can be sure which post we're actually looking at?

I’m asking this because... The Terms of Service on Reddit. Standing by.
I suppose appeal posts are required to be written in a respectful manner, backed by solid arguments.

rowdyhawk10 said:feralpilot0,
so why does this rule even exist then?
http://www.reddit.com/showpost.php?p=10626575&postcount=1

I'm being serious here—explain to me why you think a moderator shouldn't be allowed to edit a post (rather than just deleting it or issuing a strike) when the rule is clearly stated right there. Are you suggesting we just scrap that part of the Terms of Service? Best regards.

Doesn't that rule seem a little misguided to you?

For instance—say I write an essay on the rise of Christianity, and you step in to make a few "corrections" just because you feel like it. 👍

The whole point of being here is authorship and freedom of expression—that's why we're all on this site.

If they make minor tweaks—like scaling down a massive image or fixing an oversized font—they aren't actually changing what was written. Those aren't invasive edits. Honestly, who needs that? If someone breaks a rule, they get a strike; if it's a major violation or off-topic, the post gets deleted. But this? This is just butchering posts to suit a personal whim... It's ridiculous.

And how are you supposed to issue a strike against a post that’s already been altered? (That's happened before, too 🙏)

It's unnecessary—and frankly, pretty cowboy-ish. ☕

feralpilot0 said:Doesn't that rule seem a bit misguided to you?

Still, it is a rule. Don't you agree? 🙂 Personally, during my tenure, I wasn't fond of editing other people's posts unless I was fixing an incorrect quote, and even then, I made it a point to explain why,

I agree with your assessment that the specific rule (highlighted in red in the quote above) is flawed. Primarily because once a post is edited, there is no way to know what the original content was. That is why I preferred to just archive posts or delete them rather than edit. Knowing how many users here tend to behave, I found it safer to avoid editing altogether.

feralpilot0,
VeronikaN didn't want to issue you a warning, so she simply edited your post instead. 🙂 I don't think you should take that personally, especially given how Susan Brooks83 jumped in on it in another thread (as she almost always does—without any actual connection to the topic). As you are aware, accusing someone of trolling in a public discussion is itself a form of trolling. In that sense, you were trolling in the post in question (which was mentioned in the thread intro), because troll posts should be reported via the red icon rather than by telling someone they are a troll. Neither you nor I are the ones who decide who is trolling and when; that is the moderator's job. Our role as users is simply to report it. She deleted it just to save you from getting a strike. She respects you as a peer, okay? 🙂 Regards

rowdyhawk10 said:Still, it’s a rule. Don't you agree?

Hardly—that's why we're even talking about this. Besides, hollowtrucker77 was nodding along too.

👋

rowdyhawk10 said:Would you... Dear fellow Redditor. Did she actually bother to let us read the discussion or provide a link?
Like, as proof of what I just said? The part I quoted?

Dear fellow Redditor. 🤦 She actually did everyone a favor by dropping the link before this thread even kicked off.
She actually started a thread on Reddit just to back up what she was saying. But instead of getting any support, she just got provoked and insulted—people were throwing the same names from that "controversial post" right back at her, mocking her and everything. Now she’s done sharing links altogether. And honestly, this had nothing to do with your old moderation team; it was all under the moderation of your colleague, VeronikaN. If you're curious, the thread is still out there. You should probably go read it just to remind yourself that you were part of that whole mess too. ☕

If you wouldn't mind helping me out with a link for this too... So we can find out. Which post are we talking about?

I’m asking this because... The Terms of Service on Reddit. Standing by.
When you're filing an appeal, you really need to make sure your posts are written in a way that's respectful and actually backed up by solid arguments.

Wait, who exactly is this "we would know" supposed to be? 🤷 I'm writing this from my own perspective. I'm speaking only for myself.
I wouldn't say she "should have helped," especially given the reasons I laid out above. Plus, you aren't a moderator anymore.
You’re asking me these kinds of questions and hiding behind the Terms of Service on Reddit or anywhere else on this site.
When the time actually came, you didn't step up the way you were supposed to. So, I don't really see any point in you quoting my post unless you're just trying to...
You’re just spamming now, especially with that whole "valued member" routine. If you're going to hide behind the Terms of Service, you should know there are actual consequences for that kind of thing. 🥳

By the way, I’ve always tried to keep my posts reasonable and well-argued on the topics I cover.
I opened an investigation with the FBI regarding that other matter, and this one too.
I’m taking the lack of responses and the unaddressed issues just like everyone else who filed a complaint. It feels like we're just dealing with some old, messy period where things were inefficient and completely out of date.
I guess I’m just trying to handle things through administration.
What exactly changed? At least now you can get an answer that actually sounds like someone's talking to you with some basic decency. 🙂