Changes highlighted in italics:

  1. Instance rules apply.
  2. [New] Be reasonable, constructive, and conductive to discussion.
  3. [Updated] Stay on-topic, specially for more divisive subjects. Avoid unnecessarily mentioning topics and individuals prone to derail the discussion.
  4. [Updated] Post sources whenever reasonable to do so. And when sharing links to paywalled content, provide either a short summary of the content or a freely accessible archive link.
  5. Avoid crack theories and pseudoscientific claims.
  6. Have fun!

What I’m looking for is constructive criticism for those rules. In special for the updated rule #3.

Thank you!

EDIT: feedback seems overwhelmingly positive, so I’m implementing the changes now. Feel free to use this thread for any sort of metadiscussion you want. Thank you all for the feedback!

  • raskolnikov@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    I’m just a lurker, but does rule #3 come from that user that started a nuclear war because someone told them their link was behind a paywall? That thread was embarrassing, so I guess it makes sense.

    • Lvxferre [he/him]
      shield
      OPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      Kinda.

      To be frank I was already considering this sort of rule ages ago, regardless of that discussion. (Nobody was “starting a nuclear war” though.) So the role of that discussion was

      • to make me consider this a more pressing matter
      • how to handle this in a way that satisfies both sides.

      I’m open to better ways to handle this, in case anyone wants to chime in.

  • davidgro@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    7 days ago

    Are comedic posts still going to be allowed? I looked through the community and saw a couple. I suppose they are covered by rule 5?

    • Lvxferre [he/him]
      shield
      OPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      7 days ago

      You mean stuff like this, right?

      This sort of stuff is mildly discouraged. People are probably better off sharing it in !linguistics_humor@sh.itjust.works instead. But as long as there’s some room for genuine discussion or info sharing about language, I won’t remove it. Because, yes, rule 5 (nobody likes “stop having fun!!1one” style e-jannies).

      Note that neither @fossilesque@mander.xyz nor me are too strict on the rules. For example I’d rather tell users “don’t do this” than to temp-ban users.

      Thank you for bringing this up!

      • davidgro@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 days ago

        I didn’t see that one, but in the recent posts there is “bro wake up, seven new laryngeals have dropped” and the xkcd about “going to”.

        Oh yeah, I forgot about linguistics_humor - even though I’m subscribed already. That does make sense.

        • Lvxferre [he/him]
          shield
          OPM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 days ago

          Ah, got it - I know which posts you’re talking about. Same deal, except that both have more room for discussion.