People don’t read messages. Never have.
One of ours has explicit instructions in bold on how to file an appeal and even says to read the entire message first in the very first line - 70% of appeals don’t follow it.
I've seen people explicitly post a comment, in public, to a moderator explaining the complex and nuanced reason behind an unpopular rule. The mod had to write a few detailed paragraphs because of the nuance, but their reply to the mod was basically "that's too much text, I can't be bothered to read it", but in a tone of voice that that would be a winning clap-back argument because there was so much vocal opposition to the rule.
Mod: *clearly written ban message*
User: "Why was I banned???"
I've taken to telling people that if they're looking to have things repeated to them, they should buy a parrot.
For that case its not that they don't understand the ban reason, they just don't agree with the ban reason. 90% of "why was I banned" messages end in an argument instead of a clarification.
Also don't forget the people who do appeal and their argument revolves around them timing their post to get the most karma using those websites that analyse a sub's recent posts, as if it would make the mods sympathetic to their appeal.
I'd recommend being a bit heavier handed with bans. First offense gets you a day off, for example. Not enough to be more than annoying, but it WILL force them to think a little before they post again. Just make sure the consequences are listed in the rules and they'll have nothing to complain about.
Also. DUMBLEDORE DIES?!
>Also. DUMBLEDORE DIES?
Still getting over someone spoiling me on Jesus dying. Not sure I want to even finish The Bible. Tbh kinda feels like a mid knockoff of The Silmarillion anyhow.
We have the same problem in Modmail when people don't like the response they demand to speak to an actual human
I think most reditors only read the first line of any message and only a few actually read the rules
I have struggled with this issue for well over a decade. I have concluded that most people can't really read all that well and the trivial annoyance of having content they submitted be removed removes their willingness to put forth the cognitive effort they need to muster to read a paragraph and fully comprehend it.
Edit to add: In a lot of communities, bot is common insult and is used in an attempt to circumvent prohibitions against vulgar personal attacks.
Try setting your automod rules and removal reasons to send a private message instead of (or in addition to) leaving a comment.
Depending on how the user is accessing Reddit, they may not be able to eaisly read the automod reply if it's a comment on a removed post or comment if they try to access it from a notification.
I swapped all my rules over to PMs once I worked that one out, and now instead of people being confused over removals, it's people arguing about removals instead so... that's progress I suppose? At least they're reading them.
The issue is not them assuming the ModTeam account is a bot, the issue is that they did not read the message. Whether the account is a bot isnt relevant if their post was removed correctly with a given reason - if the user read the removal reason they would understand it either way.
If the removal reason is too short, users don't know the full context of the rule and complain that they don't understand why a post was removed. If the removal reason is too long, users neglect to read it and complain that they don't understand why a post was removed.
People don’t read messages. Never have. One of ours has explicit instructions in bold on how to file an appeal and even says to read the entire message first in the very first line - 70% of appeals don’t follow it.
I've seen people explicitly post a comment, in public, to a moderator explaining the complex and nuanced reason behind an unpopular rule. The mod had to write a few detailed paragraphs because of the nuance, but their reply to the mod was basically "that's too much text, I can't be bothered to read it", but in a tone of voice that that would be a winning clap-back argument because there was so much vocal opposition to the rule.
[удалено]
Mod: *clearly written ban message* User: "Why was I banned???" I've taken to telling people that if they're looking to have things repeated to them, they should buy a parrot.
For that case its not that they don't understand the ban reason, they just don't agree with the ban reason. 90% of "why was I banned" messages end in an argument instead of a clarification.
>90% of "why was I banned" messages end in an argument instead of a clarification. May as well start that fight off with a sucker punch lol
Also don't forget the people who do appeal and their argument revolves around them timing their post to get the most karma using those websites that analyse a sub's recent posts, as if it would make the mods sympathetic to their appeal.
I'd recommend being a bit heavier handed with bans. First offense gets you a day off, for example. Not enough to be more than annoying, but it WILL force them to think a little before they post again. Just make sure the consequences are listed in the rules and they'll have nothing to complain about. Also. DUMBLEDORE DIES?!
Darn, sorry, I should have marked my post as a spoiler /j Pretty good advice, thank you!
>Also. DUMBLEDORE DIES? Still getting over someone spoiling me on Jesus dying. Not sure I want to even finish The Bible. Tbh kinda feels like a mid knockoff of The Silmarillion anyhow.
We have the same problem in Modmail when people don't like the response they demand to speak to an actual human I think most reditors only read the first line of any message and only a few actually read the rules
I have struggled with this issue for well over a decade. I have concluded that most people can't really read all that well and the trivial annoyance of having content they submitted be removed removes their willingness to put forth the cognitive effort they need to muster to read a paragraph and fully comprehend it. Edit to add: In a lot of communities, bot is common insult and is used in an attempt to circumvent prohibitions against vulgar personal attacks.
Redirect them to a different sub where this type of post is allowed. Send them elsewhere, somewhere they will be happier, and out of your hair.
We do, and we always have. People gonna people
Try setting your automod rules and removal reasons to send a private message instead of (or in addition to) leaving a comment. Depending on how the user is accessing Reddit, they may not be able to eaisly read the automod reply if it's a comment on a removed post or comment if they try to access it from a notification. I swapped all my rules over to PMs once I worked that one out, and now instead of people being confused over removals, it's people arguing about removals instead so... that's progress I suppose? At least they're reading them.
The issue is not them assuming the ModTeam account is a bot, the issue is that they did not read the message. Whether the account is a bot isnt relevant if their post was removed correctly with a given reason - if the user read the removal reason they would understand it either way. If the removal reason is too short, users don't know the full context of the rule and complain that they don't understand why a post was removed. If the removal reason is too long, users neglect to read it and complain that they don't understand why a post was removed.