Thread by @Conaw

Last week I went on a bit of rampage banning folks on our subreddit

Committing to putting up SOMETHING explaining my reasoning in next 4 hours.

Posting here for accountability to deadline

So far, at least updated the rules to more accurately reflect what I’ve actually banned folks for

Very possible these could actually be net-negative to sensemaking and building a healthy community

Actually welcome disagreement

IF it’s type 3 or higher

paulgraham.com/disagree.html

Rough drafting it here, but few points

1. The amount of effort it takes to refute bullshit* is an order of magnitude greater than the effort it takes to produce it

2. Roam subreddit much smaller than our userbase, yet many posts have been from people who are loudly not users

Bullshit I want better term for, as even some well intentioned—and some users— end up posting speculation or extrapolation that would be very difficult to respond to (touches 3rd party where it’d be inappropriate for us to comment)

In general I mean out of context partial truths

This: feels weird to say — but even when the whole team was MOST engaged, and most responsive to community on Twitter and Slack, Reddit was always way way more cynical

Result: no one on the team ever enjoyed hanging out there, much less appeal for power users, downward spiral

https://twitter.com/RichDecibels/status/1445307737479524352

Ok, 3 hours left till I’m putting this down for now

Had a few folks on the team steelman reasons I’ve been wrong to ban on Reddit or block on Twitter in our team Roam, but it’s always easier if concern is live for you personally

If you had any concerns: would love to hear here

Only slightly over alloted time reddit.com/r/RoamResearch…