view the rest of the comments
Malicious Compliance
People conforming to the letter, but not the spirit, of a request. For now, this includes text posts, images, videos and links. Please ensure that the “malicious compliance” aspect is apparent - if you’re making a text post, be sure to explain this part; if it’s an image/video/link, use the “Body” field to elaborate.
======
-
We ENCOURAGE posts about events that happened to you, or someone you know.
-
We ACCEPT (for now) reposts of good malicious compliance stories (from other platforms) which did not happen to you or someone you knew. Please use a [REPOST] tag in such situations.
-
We DO NOT ALLOW fiction, or posts that break site-wide rules.
======
Also check out the following communities:
!fakehistoryporn@lemmy.world !unethicallifeprotips@lemmy.world
To try and be charitable to the WPT mods: that sub is a magnet for bots and bad actors. All those measures sound like a shotgun approach to combating spam to me.
I really don't envy having to moderate a large politically oriented sub like that. I imagine it burns you out fast to being open and fair-minded in how you approach moderation due to the sheer avalanche of bullshit you're confronted with cleaning up.
Combating bots by banning anyone without an email is understandable and seems doable for the near future, but like it would mostly be a hiccup for the people churning them out.
Google ignores any periods in an email address, so if you want to sign up with the same email all you have to do is fill it with differently-placed periods. What are they gonna do? Ban everyone who shares your name from having a reddit? Ban Gmail? If they did, there's still the plus trick that isn't specific to gmail
I do understand that point of view, but the fact that they're piloting a really invasive tool on behalf of the admins and subsequently refused to go black -- these make me feel far less charitable