unpopular opinion: moderation is massively overrated
Trying to settle this properly because the thread from last year went in circles.
The claim: moderation matters. The counter-claim: it is measurement error. Both sides have been asserting it confidently for about 9 months without either producing anything.
What would actually settle it is 39 people measuring the same thing the same way. I have started; my numbers are below. They lean one way but not strongly enough for me to declare victory.
If you have data, post the data. If you have an opinion, flair it as an opinion.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Every time this gets posted it hits the front page and every time someone has to re-explain it.
Removed a chain here. The rule is one line long and it is not negotiable.
Week 72 for me and the honest summary is: 23kg down, nausea manageable, and I have thought about food maybe four times today.
This is correct. Modmail first.
Sceptical. If this were true we would see it reflected in the data and we do not.
This is correct. Modmail first.
You have restated the marketing copy. What is the actual substance here.
moderation appeals go through modmail first
This is correct. Modmail first.
moderation appeals go through modmail first
Not to be pedantic but wiki and ranking are being used interchangeably and they are not interchangeable in real life.
What are you comparing it against though?
Strongly agree. Transparency wins.
- 1Every time this gets posted it hits the front page and every time someone…10 comments in this branch · started by u/enzo_fonseca
- 2This is correct. Modmail first.6 comments in this branch · started by u/maren_baptista