[Announcement] wiki rewrite finished — 22 community wikis live
wiki rewrite finished — 22 community wikis live, and here is what changes in practice if it goes ahead.
The evidence standard on the vendor boards requires a document, a date or a named service behind any claim about a supplier. It is what makes those threads worth reading years later.
Moderation of individual cases happens in modmail rather than in threads, because a public discussion of one person’s removal is worse for that person than a private one.
Submissions older than a year are archived: readable, linkable, and closed to new comments. That keeps a three-year-old thread from being reopened with a reply nobody will see in context.
Screenshot none of this. Read the whole thread, including the parts where I am told I am wrong.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Vendor source pages carry an outbound link to the supplier’s own storefront, marked nofollow and sponsored, disclosed on the page and again on the funding page. Nothing is received for it.
vendor source pages link storefronts and the link is marked
Vendor source pages carry an outbound link to the supplier’s own storefront, marked nofollow and sponsored, disclosed on the page and again on the fun
Disagreeing with this bit: making individual cases public by default is worse for the person being moderated.
Sorted by controversial for a week and found four of the best threads I have read here.
Same view — strict evidence rules make this board slower and make the archive worth reading in three years.
nobody here is paid, including the moderators
The ranking functions are published: the hot ordering combines score magnitude with age, and the controversial ordering weights total volume by the balance between up and down votes. Both are reproducible from the numbers on each submission.
no referral links, no affiliate links, not once
Left up and flaired Proposal — it has replacement wording, which is what this board asks for.