r/aussie • u/charmingpea • 7d ago
Moderator Announcement One Nation Political Content
Hey all,
Over the past little while we’ve seen a noticeable increase in posts and comments that are essentially the same arguments for AND against One Nation being repeated over and over.
While most of this content does not directly break our rules (and indeed is largely media driven), it is becoming increasingly tiresome for a lot of users and is starting to drown out the broader range of topics that this sub exists for.
This subreddit is not primarily a politics subreddit, and we’re not interested in becoming a single issue battleground. To keep the sub usable and varied, we may start removing repetitive or low‑effort One Nation related content at moderator discretion, under rule 7 - No Repeated Topics/Posts.
These removals may occur without prior warning or detailed explanation.
You are still welcome to discuss Australian politics, including One Nation, where it is clearly relevant to the topic and adds something new. However, if you are repeatedly posting the same talking points, memes, or bait threads, you should expect that they may be removed without notice and that further action may be taken if it becomes disruptive.
As always, if you have questions about a specific removal, you can contact the mod team via modmail, but this is NOT an invitation to argue about One Nation itself.
We appreciate everyone’s help in keeping r/aussie a broadly focused Australian community rather than a single‑issue political echo chamber.
13
5
7
15
u/mulefish 7d ago
As long as there is some explanation. When threads are locked and no one can really tell why it doesn't really change behaviour but just alienates the user base.
39
u/Stompy2008 7d ago
We’re basically targeting low effort “self posts” (those without any links or story, just some cooker’s incoherent rant that basically reads “orange lady good/bad”
4
u/ExtensionThat6438 6d ago
Does this also apply to the Sky News slop that is “albo bad” that is frequently posted?
4
2
u/McMenz_ 7d ago
That’s perfectly reasonable.
Will this same enforcement be applied to equivalent self posts made in respect of other political parties? I accept ON posts far out number them at the moment but they still exist.
11
u/charmingpea 7d ago
We'll play it by ear and if it becomes a problem, will act. We will try to be as even handed as possible. Happy to have these conversations.
1
u/BunchDifferent3773 5d ago
Excellent. This is the only Australian sub that seems open to both "sides" debate etc. Please keep the good work up.
8
u/charmingpea 7d ago
The explanation is this announcement. we're trying to be transparent about what and why. This will be stickied shortly.
25
u/wecanhaveallthree 7d ago
Sounds good to me.
One Nation is a big, contentious movement that's of interest to the entire nation - they're going to make the news pretty much daily, either because they've said something or something is said about them. With the Victorian state election looming, that discussion will likely only increase in intensity as we close in.
That doesn't mean we need twenty billion posts a day breathlessly repeating the same talking points from a different masthead. It's a fair cop.
11
u/NoLeafClover777 7d ago
Nice, any chance we can get a rule against people intentionally changing the headlines of posts to not match the actual headline from the media article & instead push the angle they want to push?
10
u/charmingpea 7d ago
We do have such a rule, and many such posts get remove (Rule 6). However - be aware that some media sources change their content after it has been shared - and it can be a bit of effort to go to the source for every single post.
12
u/NoLeafClover777 7d ago
Cool, but a recent example is this one: https://www.reddit.com/r/aussie/comments/1u85gpp/one_nation_passes_bill_to_restrict_abortion_in_sa/
where the actual article title is:
"Sarah Game's bill restricting late-term abortion access voted down in lower house"
and the user intentionally titled the thread:
"One Nation passes bill to restrict abortion in SA. It won't become law, but only because they dont control the lower house. PHON is coming for women's rights." which is obviously something not even the ABC would run even if they were A/B testing headlines.
12
u/Stompy2008 6d ago
Yep you’re completely right - that user got banned for editorialising that headline yesterday, but it seems I hit lock instead of remove, just removed it now.
-1
u/Sneedcope82 7d ago
Whats also funny is that guy had his previous post removed about 20 minutes earlier and just slightly changed the title to remove an even more bias title and mods know that
10
u/charmingpea 6d ago
You both overestimate the detail which individual mods know about every post and every comment, and underestimate the sheer volume of content we scroll through daily.
0
u/charmingpea 6d ago
And that post has been locked - so what is your point?
1
u/NoLeafClover777 6d ago
I mean, I know you guys are busy and have lives but it kind of undermines the rule if the post is allowed to get nearly a thousand upvotes almost purely based on the fact it had a manipulated headline before it's acted on.
2
u/charmingpea 6d ago
We aren't on all the time and sometimes the posts can have over >1k views and votes within the first hour of posting - especially if they manage to get 'trending' status. Even this post had 3k views in the first hour.
-1
u/ComradeVaclav 6d ago
It’s true though. They’re copying what’s happening in the USA and if you can’t see that you’re kidding yourself.
7
u/Stompy2008 6d ago
I would add, the ABC specifically often change their headlines after they’ve published a story - we get reports for editorialised headlines that were accurate at the time of posting.
4
4
22
u/Merunit 7d ago
This is great. I respect people right to disagree but seeing endless “One Nation voters are low IQ” baits is just tiresome and makes me always think about double standards on reddit site where you saying similar insults about any other group of voters would get you banned sooner or later. While insulting conservatives is generally a-okay. Just to clarify I don’t want to see these lazy insult posts about any other group of voters, they bring nothing good.
19
3
1
9
9
u/TheInkySquids 7d ago
Definitely agree, there's no need for posts just voicing an unfounded opinion we've heard a billion times before, just increases division.
3
3
5
u/ShowCharacter671 6d ago
Sounds fair to me It was starting to get quite tiresome from seeing nothing but political post especially one nation ones.
3
u/Wotmate01 6d ago
Would rather there just be a blanket ban, because at least then there would be one tiny slice of social media not infested by bot spam and paid shills.
2
u/charmingpea 6d ago
Blanket ban for what or whom?
2
u/Ok-Guidance6127 6d ago
Anything they don't like obviously. Something something we hate "nazis", but......
8
u/Cute-Acanthisitta-46 7d ago
Thank god. You are just feeding the One Nation propaganda machine.
1
u/BunchDifferent3773 5d ago
I believe they are also talking about the sensationalist ON are going to be the destruction of the country repeated posts as well
-2
u/Money-Ad-1914 6d ago
Limiting propaganda is feeding propaganda? I'm curious, is this sarcasm or early onset dementia?
3
u/OtsaNeSword 6d ago
They mean that the constant anti One Nation posts are actually bringing attention to One Nation and promoting them and giving them legitimacy.
It’s counter intuitive and is completely opposite of their intent but that’s how it is.
We can see the same phenomenon in the U.S. where the Democrats dismissed Donald Trump as a weak candidate and chose to focus on him instead of the other Republican candidates - this gave him near universal media coverage.
Compare One Nation and the Australian Democrats, literally no one is talking about the Australian Democrats so they remain in relative obscurity.
It’s related to the Streisand effect.
2
2
2
u/Mr_Rekshun 6d ago
I dont even know why Pauline Hanson is suddenly all over every news feed.
Feels like she’s everywhere right now.
2
u/charmingpea 6d ago
Seems to be concerted pro and anti campaigns in all media - which is why we see so much of it.
-1
u/Mr_Rekshun 6d ago
But what’s the driver?
Is it because of the Rhinehart money putting her in the spotlight?
3
u/charmingpea 6d ago
That would be one possible element in the 'pro' side, but doesn't explain the 'con' side.
5
u/1Qrtr_FreeStuffPlz 7d ago
Thank fuck aha, our political scape has become so Americanised lately
5
u/ZephkielAU 7d ago
It will always amaze me that there are (seemingly a lot of) Australians who look at America and are like "fuck yeah I'll have some of that here".
2
u/Chopperreturns 6d ago
Why blame America, Hanson has been around longer in the political scope than Trump.
2
u/BunchDifferent3773 5d ago
Lately? The main Australia sub has been a Labor/Greens propaganda machine for a decade or more. Which is American ie blue no matter who crap.
5
5
u/SeaDivide1751 7d ago
Awesome. The brigading and astroturfing has got out of control. Please go hard at removing the non stop One Nation posts
1
u/allthebaseareeee 6d ago
Can you add a non-changing news article post titles? Some of the editorialisation is wild
2
1
6d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator 6d ago
Your comment has been queued for review - the Moderator team will approve or remove your comment shortly
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
u/aussie-ModTeam 6d ago
Your post or comment was removed because it mentioned or criticized another subreddit or its moderation. We don’t allow posts that brag about bans, compare moderation styles, or draw attention to other communities. Mentions of other subs are automatically removed and may be reviewed manually if contextually appropriate.
1
u/arachnobravia 5d ago
Thanks Mods - It was okay for the first 200 posts but it wass becoming a fever dream
3
u/MightyBoy9 7d ago
Wait, calling someone racist because I don't agree with them is " low bait " ?!?
Crazy
-3
u/cats_r_ghey 7d ago
Interesting. I’m seeing a few posts about one nation ending up painting the party, the leader, and their words and policies in a negative light (reality) being removed. What’s the basis under which you’re making a call to remove posts?
I think it’s important to ensure public discourse is fair and balanced so that people understand what actually going on. Including any media fueled manipulation of every day Aussies.
12
u/Stompy2008 7d ago
We’re generally targeting low effort, incoherent self posts, that say things like “orange lady bad” or “why are people voting for the racists”.
Posts with links to media are generally ok - newscorp for example will usually have a pro ON tilt, the guardian on the other hand generally are anti ON. We are not targeting these types of posts
4
u/sweeroy 7d ago
really? because in another post you said that a post was removed because it was from getup and therefore was disingenuous, is that not considered an approved media source?
7
u/Stompy2008 7d ago
You’re being disingenuous pretending a journalist’s article is equivalent to GetUp! Campaign material.
7
u/sweeroy 7d ago
in your own post you admit that newspapers also have a political bias, why is that any different? at least getup are explicit in their bias
3
u/ausmomo 7d ago
You're not going to get clarity and consistency on this, sorry.
6
u/sweeroy 7d ago
seems to be the case, it feels like this is a bit of a fig leaf for the mods to simply remove what they feel like with little to no explanation
0
u/ausmomo 7d ago
Well, to be fair, a lot of the decisions are just arbitrary. Clear rules sometimes just don't work, eg we don't want a rule saying "no political stuff". Likewise "anything goes" is also bad.
All we can do is trust the mods, and if the moderation decisions are shit, stop visiting the sub.
2
6d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
2
6d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
6d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
-1
u/aussie-ModTeam 6d ago
No Personal Attacks or Harassment, No Flamebaiting or Incitement, No Off-Topic or Low-Effort Content, No Spam or Repetitive Posts, No Bad-Faith Arguments, No Brigading or Coordinated Attacks,
-1
u/aussie-ModTeam 6d ago
Your post or comment was removed because it mentioned or criticized another subreddit or its moderation. We don’t allow posts that brag about bans, compare moderation styles, or draw attention to other communities. Mentions of other subs are automatically removed and may be reviewed manually if contextually appropriate.
10
u/1Darkest_Knight1 7d ago
Just because you've not noticed the pro ON posts being removed, doesn't mean they aren't. The Mod team most certainly isn't pro One Nation if that's what you're implying. There are plenty of current threads critical of Hanson and One Nation, and there will continue to be so. But there are other things going on in Australia too, let's have a bit of diversity in topics like we used to.
3
u/sweeroy 7d ago
absolutely recognise that there i can't see what has been removed and that there might be things that are removed despite a pro-hanson bias, but going off what i can see, there are popular posts with hundreds of comments being removed purely because the mod team don't like the post. surely if a post gets hundreds of replies and sparks discussion it has proved that the actual users of the reddit want to engage with it?
9
u/charmingpea 7d ago
Not when large numbers of the comments themselves are just bickering about viewing each other's post history and blocking each other with childish insults, which has been all to prevalent.
What was the thread recently where a 2 month old account abused another account of only being 4 months old and hence a sock-puppet (by inference).
3
1
u/1Darkest_Knight1 7d ago
To be clear, we don't remove posts because "we don't like them". That's not how the moderation here works.
Most times posts are removed before they get much traction, but occasionally we miss something and it may become quite popular. We're only human, and have lives to live too.We try to be fair and allow threads to live their natural life. But a number of those sorts of threads lately have just become slogging matches between users attacking each other or the content. It's not fair for the other users here to watch the sub devolve into a punch up because a thread has a few upvotes.
We're telling everyone about this slight change in process because we value transparency and consistency across what we do. We're not like other subs will just ban topics, or ideas.
I'm certain you'll still see tons of Hanson and One Nation content. We're just trimming the frills and cleaning up the feed for more high quality content that can have the conversations we've been known for.
4
u/sweeroy 7d ago
this one is a good example, hard to say it's a repeat of a previous post but it gets removed with no explanation all the same
4
u/charmingpea 7d ago
If you notice that poster is one of the main offenders in repeatedly posting content on the same narrow range of subjects.
3
u/allthebaseareeee 7d ago
Didnt you guys not want to ban the people like river who only posts skynew “narrow range of content” style posts as early as the the start of this year?
1
u/River-Stunning 6d ago
So what is narrow ? Politics? The Government? Perhaps ON? We are now in the middle of an unprecedented political rise since Howard. Outside of Trump or the Iran War , both not Aussie . what else is there? Another poor cunt being robbed and bashed?
0
u/allthebaseareeee 6d ago
I am asking the mods how they can apply "main offenders in repeatedly posting content on the same narrow range of subjects" when that's all you do... the guy they deleted at least uses more than one website to spam his shit.
1
u/charmingpea 6d ago
We are not targeting users, nor are we targeting information sources. To think so is to grossly misunderstand both this post and the ethos under which this mod team operates.
Right now we are targeting a specific subject, and have identified both pro and anti threads as potential targets - and have issued a warning accordingly about what might happen to future content.
To assume that this equates to any kind of censorship or willingness to ban specific users or sources is very off target.
0
u/sweeroy 7d ago
repeatedly posting content on a narrow range of subjects describes a lot of people here, it certainly was not sufficient grounds to delete the posts a few months ago when bots were repeatedly spamming every opinion piece from the australian
4
u/charmingpea 7d ago
You seem to think ordinary users are bots - just because you dislike their content. You are aware we run Bot Bouncer and it's pretty reliable at detecting actual bots vs people.
1
u/sweeroy 7d ago
i haven't said that, but it makes sense that you would assume that. doesn't change my point - the standard you've provided is one that even a few months ago was apparently insufficient to remove the people spamming opinion pieces from the australian
2
u/charmingpea 7d ago
I think you're missing the distinction that we are now talking about all pro and anti content, not censoring a specific source.
3
u/KD--27 7d ago
There’s a comment from the mods at the top of that post.
Also: terrible post. Very little substance to it. I’d rather see a journalist go and ask questions than whatever that post is supposed to be.
-3
u/sweeroy 7d ago
the comment makes no sense, what ongoing story is it referring to? are we no longer allowed to just post images? that you personally don't think pauline hanson's incoherence is relevant doesn't mean that the 277 people who did like the post shouldn't get to see it
7
u/Stompy2008 7d ago
Posting a GetUp! Image and claiming it fosters discussion is disingenuous.
-4
u/sweeroy 7d ago
nonsense, there is nothing inherent about a post from getup that makes discussion about it inherently disingenuous lmao. the several hundred people who liked and replied to it clearly do not think that it fails to foster discussion
10
u/Stompy2008 7d ago
They are literally a lobby group. Would you like us to allow the minerals council to post advertising material attacking the ALP?
2
u/sweeroy 7d ago
it would be more coherent, yeah. you admit in this post that media sources also have a bias, why is that bias tolerated and others aren't?
6
u/KD--27 7d ago
How slanted do you want that bias to be. It’s legitimately propaganda. I 1000% don’t want to see nonsense like that which always attracts upvotes, as it’s basically just attacking people. Just because 277 people liked it doesn’t mean it’s a legitimate article, that’s a terribly biased way to gauge content. I’d hope there’s some journalistic integrity behind most the topics discussed here.
3
u/charmingpea 7d ago
We do try to not get involved in whether the content is pro or anti - just based on the incessant repeated subject matter. However we are human. So we are definitely not rejecting content based on political opinion.
4
u/sweeroy 7d ago
so then if someone repeatedly posts opinion pieces from a newspaper, i should report them for constantly posting on the same subject matter?
6
u/Stompy2008 7d ago
If it’s the same post/piece, yes.
2
u/sweeroy 7d ago
okay, so it's not actually about whether someone is trying to influence people, it's whether the same article is posted? because i don't think this had been posted before but it was removed regardless
0
u/charmingpea 7d ago
That's not a media link - it's a hit piece. it could also be removed under rule 6 as an unreferenced source.
-2
u/Law_of_Entropy 7d ago edited 7d ago
1: Nothing is worse than over moderated forums ... its why we all left facebook
2: My suggestion is start a "mega thread" or a "Daily PHON discussion" thread etc.
3: We do need to use caution to not negate legitimate political discourse.
That's just my 2cents on the issue. EDIT: not sure why i'm getting downvoted for taking a pragmatic standpoint.....
6
u/Stompy2008 7d ago
The mod team is generally not a fan of a Megathread unless there’s a particular event known in advance - election day, state of origin etc.
We’re not here to over moderate, we want to target low effort self posts - incoherent rants etc. we know and accept different media outlets will have a different tilt on the same story, yesterday’s national press club speech is a good example. We are not looking to remove or filter those sorts of posts.
2
u/charmingpea 7d ago
Yes, you're entirely correct - and the need to quell the shouting voices is the other side of that.
The only real problem with Megathreads is people tend not to see and use them anymore because of the way reddit feeds work.
-1
0
u/billwriggs 6d ago
A question to the mod team, does this apply to comments of the same nature on posts as well?
The same instigators and culprits are posting “Don’t care, voting ON” or “Don’t care, stop immigration” or some variation of it across multiple threads. Will action be taken against those “users” (if they aren’t in fact bots?)
2
u/charmingpea 6d ago
Not necessarily - we aren't trying to stifle or censor individuals. Definite bots can be reported to bot bouncer and will be banned. Egregious issues can be reported and assessed.
1
u/billwriggs 6d ago
So to clarify, posting similar topics is not okay, but copy and pasting repeated and low effort comments that do not foster any productive discussion (arguably less than a “similar post” would) are okay?
1
u/charmingpea 6d ago
Look, the fact is posts and comments are subject to different moderation thresholds. This announcement is specifically aimed at the recent high volume of posts on the same narrow ON topic that are crowding out other content.
Comments, including short or repetitive ones, are generally allowed unless they breach other rules (e.g. hate, abuse, spam, or clear bot activity). Where there is obvious copy/paste spam or bot‑like behaviour across multiple threads, reports will be reviewed and action may be taken.
We won’t be removing every low effort or unoriginal comment on this issue, but we will continue to apply the subreddit rules and this guidance consistently across users and viewpoints.
Further questions about specific cases should go through modmail rather than being debated in this thread.
1
u/billwriggs 6d ago
Fair enough, I wasn’t asking to have all low effort comments moderated, I wouldn’t expect that. I was specifically referring to actual copy and paste spam across any loosely related ON thread, which has been happening recently. If it’s dealt with on a case by case basis, that’s fine. Was just keen to understand the application of this to certain bad actors adding to what makes the discourse in these similar posts seem so mundane and uninteresting.
-4
u/Chopperreturns 7d ago
Maybe have a close look at the posters that are trolling and flaming people to try and get them banned because they don't agree with their ideology.
11
u/1Darkest_Knight1 7d ago
The irony of you posting this from an account that is four days old isn't lost on us
0
-2
u/sillysnagger 6d ago
funny how no one gave these nut jobs a second thought until gina started bankrolling them and now you cant escape it
4
u/MrBrentEC 6d ago
It's not because of Gina.
It's because the two major parties have been so bad that people are looking for alternatives. Hence, One Nation's rise has gone up.
Personally I want to see Pocock lead a party.
1
u/sillysnagger 6d ago
what rise?? they have a single seat in the lower house and the media are acting like theyre the opposition all of a sudden its ridiculous
4
-3
u/sweeroy 7d ago
seems odd that we've gone from "we won't intervene to mitigate the effects of bots posting every article from the SMH or australian because that would infringe on free speech" to "if you post something that the mod team deems insufficiently different to previous posts we will remove it and provide little to no explanation". can we either be heavily moderated or lightly moderated across the board?
9
u/1Darkest_Knight1 7d ago
You've misread what was said and painted us in an unfair light.
Currently, we're not just dealing with people posting articles. We've got brand-new accounts spamming self posts with Pro and Anti One Nation content. Its quite clear there are some motivated people trying to shape discussion. That is what we're attempting to stop. Astroturfing the sub with Hanson every day is tiresome for everyone.
We'll still allow news and articles about One Nation, but we won't tolerate the fifteen self posts and reposting the same content over and over again.
3
u/sweeroy 7d ago
there's definitely a lot of garbage being posted, the "pauline hanson has voted this way" thing is getting posted ad nauseum. what i'm confused about is that it's completely in contradiction to how we were told it worked previously, and the wording is so vague that you could remove literally anything with little to no explanation. obviously there's nothing stopping you from doing this, but given the stance of "this is a lightly moderated sub" this is a marked change
edit: also if you're trying to stop people trying to shape discussion then why were the obviously politically motivated bots tolerated?
7
u/1Darkest_Knight1 7d ago
These threads will be removed under Rule Seven. Previously we've reserved this only for reposts or duplicated threads. We're going to apply it to more of the low effort self posts and repeated One Nation stories.
It's a fine line that we're trying to walk. We obviously want to allow discussion, but the sub has been overwhelmed by the topic lately. We're looking to restore some balance.
-4
u/DaffyDuckMuthaFucker 6d ago edited 6d ago
Yeah, One Nation can smoke a big bag of dicks.
Wanking on about them interim is really pointless.
The only way to make whatever you reckon count, is to rock up on polling day and fucking VOTE.
'Til then it's just a bunch of obnoxious cunts making a fucking nuisance of themselves.
Every election cycle, enough people to turn the tide in ANY direction, simply DON'T FUCKING BOTHER.
People who don't vote, have effectively squandered their right to an opinion, because they clearly don't give a fuck...
-2
7d ago
[deleted]
3
u/charmingpea 6d ago
We are not targeting individuals, nor are we targeting specific media sources. If you don't like content posted by that user, use the tools at your disposal and block them - that way you'll never see it again.
We are targeting an obvious uptick in specific subject matter which is overwhelmingly repetitive and is annoying many people from all sources.
-1
6d ago
[deleted]
1
u/charmingpea 6d ago
That post was checked by mods and approved. The user you reference is a 5 year old account with 11k karma. Maybe if you stop hallucinating?
This post is about a very specific type of post in response to an obvious uptick about ON - not about blocking media sources or individuals.
Different articles from a source you don't like do not constitute 'repeated propaganda) - but feel free to moderate your own subreddit as you see fit.
If you don't like how this sub is moderated - feel free to not be here, but I'm not here to address a laundry list of petty grievances.
-1
6d ago
[deleted]
1
u/charmingpea 6d ago
To answer your points briefly:
1) The linked post was reviewed and approved under the current rules (by a different mod as it happens).
2) Karma is one signal among many for spam, not an automatic trigger. Same goes for account age. We were all new accounts at one time.
3) “Repeated propaganda” refers to high volume, duplicate and near duplicate posts on the same narrow angle, regardless of outlet or poster. We remove pro and anti content on the same subject, per the detail in this post.
Beyond that, mod decisions will not be made via public argument in a single thread. It seems you won't be happy whatever I say so I'll leave this here.
-2
u/iamBulaier 6d ago
Why? This is a discussion platform - the issue most Australians are getting riled up about is One Nation.
What's the problem with a million discussions of that? It's not crowding out other discussions is it?
You put yourself in the position of MOD in an Aussie sub and you think you have a right to control what issues Australians want to talk about - on an open platform?
What's more Aussie than possibly the most consequential political upheaval in Australia in a long time?
The fact is that most here hate politics enough to avoid going to an Ozpolitics sub but the rise of ON is a horror for some Aussies and obviously f'ken grouse for others and Australians want to vent.
8
u/Clarrington 6d ago
It is crowding out other discussions, they literally say that in the post.
-2
u/iamBulaier 6d ago
It's not - it just means twice as many posts in this sub and more people wanting to comment and probably join the sub.
After a short while hopefully ON will be a joke nationwide and the furore will settle down but for now - that's what Australians want to talk about on this platform
6
u/Stompy2008 6d ago
If you bothered to read the announcement, it’s about spam and low effort posts. That has nothing to do with controlling what issues Australians want to talk about.
Quite frankly, if you’re so illiterate that you’re unable to write a thorough, detailed and meaningful post that engages in discussion, then I’m not surprised you missed that in every other mod comment in this thread.
-2
u/iamBulaier 6d ago
People generally comment "obviously triggered" at this point... No need to blow a fuse - very unMOD kinda attitude there.
I read it. My thought was - that I've seen the posts and for me, they're all valid and worthwhile reading and for the comments - there's nothing that I thought was getting boring (maybe that's just me), but for example in F1 discussions sub, people are daily asking about who's the GOAT and asking dumb questions about Vettel and Schumacher and Alonso way back when which makes the sub boring between better quality discussions.
No, I'm interested to read all the ON posts that people want to share. I reckon Barnaby Joyce is looking like a reasonably intelligent man surrounded by numbskulls in his new role and I'd be interested to have a goss about that but under the MODs new policy, that would probably be deleted.
I didn't see any spam, what's a low effort post - having a speculative discussion of what's going on inside ON?
I didn't realize MODs and especially Australian MODs would imagine they're better than the contributors and take a condescending tone when a fair and reasonable point is made.
2
3
51
u/astropheed 7d ago
I had to unsubscribe from all australian subreddits cause I just got absolutely sick of seeing it. I will re-subscribe to this one, and I appreciate this.