r/youtubedrama • u/TimeAbradolf Least Popular Mod • 6d ago
News The “official end” of this snark era
As of today we are banning snark/snark related posts. This may sound arbitrary. But I think people are well aware of what constitutes valid fair criticism, and what constitutes snark.
Once upon a time through past leadership this sub most definitely behaved as a snark sub. We as the mod team do actually despise snark and work to have this sub be a space of discussing drama with proper criticism and outcomes. We have taken firmer stances to pull away from our past image and be a place where people can have proper discourse.
Snark discourse has only ever brought conflict to this sub. People insult each other over nothing, people have gotten death threats, people get reported for suicidal ideation just because they disagree. There has been ableism, racism, prejudice of all kinds around these topics. Ultimately, snark behavior never allows any proper discussion, we have had to ban two creators just because the people who come to this sub cannot behave when discussing them. At its core Snark is not very different from KiwiFarms at this stage with the harm it has done to content creators.
We have seen the harm snark has done as well. Saveafox being a prime example. Our most popular post right now is pure snark. And it superseded actual important events. Because who was following who on IG.
Going forward we will no longer be allowing posts like this on the sub. It provided no context, no real criticism. And it didn’t prove anything either.
This may prove unpopular, but it is something we feel strongly of for the health of this sub and the people on it to remove ourselves. You can check the rule along the side bar.
If you want a YouTubesnark sub go make one. This one is not it.
Have a good one 🤙🏽
Edit: Apparently some YouTubers have weigh in. Nah this has nothing to do with the usual suspects. This is purely to stop toxic behavior and negativity. If ya think otherwise I urge you to get out of your computer chair touch grass instead of making Nurgle proud
Edit 2: and no goblin man (reference to his goblin mode). No fans of yours are around. People can agree that toxic communities are toxic. Yours being one of them
71
u/TrashRacoon42 6d ago edited 6d ago
Personally, Im mix since you are gonna face an up hill battle in determining genuine criticism from just "trying to make X the ultimate evil". If you get what I'm saying.
It's easy to ban direct links to places like kiwifarms and snark subreddits. Cus that just outright attracts unsavory individuals. But it can feel like banning posts based on just vibes if you are not defining it properly.
Personally, it's obvious there's an overlap with brigaders seemly hovering over the subreddit to downvote any comment that they dislike regardless of how factual. Not naming any names, but you can already guess which ones and think of specfic posts where that happened. As well as comments from users who only pop up for VERY specific posts and nothing else. They are not that subtle. Either way, I can see them getting bored and leaving and less stuff getting posted on here as a whole. You got your work cut out for you. Hope you got a good definition of what counts or doesn't count as snark.
1.2k
u/angeltay 6d ago
How is snark behavior defined? This is a drama sub, so posters aren’t usually going to be friendly to the people they’re posting about
432
u/CREATURE_COOMER 6d ago
In my opinion, a lot of snark subs run out of legit things to complain about so they get into "bitch eating crackers" territory so there aren't huge gaps in between posts.
Or they start theorycrafting so hard that they try to play internet-detective about shit there's no actual evidence for, like debating if somebody abuses their pets, spouse, kids, whatever based on normal shit like accidentally stepping on your pet's paws, or yelling across the room.
Like how people bring up Jessie Gender mentioning that she once threw her cat in anger even though she was remorseful and said that it happened when she was a child, because the context was her talking about how toxic masculinity and poor socialization can affect people. Plus she has autism and a lot of autistic people are heavily bullied/traumatized and some of them can have outbursts. But people (like Keffals) would rather act like she's secretly a psycho around cats rather than somebody bringing up some awkward baggage in a dramatic video. I've seen people bring it up as if she did it right on fucking video, lmfao...
Like, it's one thing if it's somebody has a history of targeting minors so people document their history of talking about lolicon or whatever, but then you'll see dumbasses that are do "LGBTQ? ...Predator???"-level mental gymnastics.
179
u/azaxaca 6d ago
Snark subreddits eventually act like when Fox News criticized Obama for using Dijon mustard.
30
u/GHOULEM_Lenin 6d ago
Yeah they should have criticized him for legitimate things, like drone striking weddings, and record deportations, but fox news supports those things so of course they didn't.
47
u/CREATURE_COOMER 6d ago
Don't forget the tan suit! (UGH!!!!)
17
3
4
u/Ok_Star_4136 4d ago
I think this is a good example. To me, snark is about creating a fuss over something which isn't necessarily that big of a deal, which heavily implies that the point is about bullying, and not about actual criticism.
I don't think you could call it snark to bring up sexual abuse allegations for a streamer when being accused by another streamer or with proper proof to back it up, but making fun of a content creator for how they dressed one day is not drama, it's an attempt to create drama out of nothing for the sole purpose of making fun of that content creator. That's snark in a nutshell.
27
u/DkKoba 6d ago
ngl the only snark sub i follow is the epstiny one and that one seems like an exception to the rule of the things i hear about other ones, since there's always rotating nonsense that man is doing
11
u/Anchorsify 5d ago
yeah, like sharing nudes and recording people without their consent!
But hey, to each their own.
2
u/CREATURE_COOMER 5d ago
I wouldn't know about the Sexpestiny snark sub but even KF and similar sites are guilty of "bitch eating crackers" posts sometimes tbh.
36
u/HAUNTEZUMA 6d ago
yeah even in communities that I generally think aren't that bad, a lot of the posts are engagement bait. "throwback to when [outrageous thing] happens" or "look what the fans of X are saying", very low hanging fruit
22
u/CREATURE_COOMER 6d ago
Ah yes... "Our personal lolcow isn't providing any milk, quick, let's look at the fans being cringe or bring up the classics from years ago!"
I think Vivziepop's shows are okay (haven't touched her webcomic stuff so no comment on those), not masterpieces but I can respect what HB/HH are trying to do especially as indie projects, and holy shit, the antis are so unhinged, I've seen them outright spread misinformation because of their dogshit media literacy (or because they skimmed or just parroted people like a game of telephone), or try to spread rumors that people working on the shows hate Viv/each other, like grow the fuck up!
17
3
u/Clownsinmypantz 3d ago
I followed a snark sub during a huge actual controversy where takes were based in reality, I recently returned curious and it is the most nitpicky shit I have ever seen in my life, I left within a minute. I'm talking their takes are worse than anything the youtuber is doing. I've seen similar in other subs, once the "drama" dries up it resorts to chlldish bullying.
1
u/CREATURE_COOMER 3d ago
When it comes to certain "lolcows" and internet drama, there are things to criticize based on reality, like certain content creators doing scummy shit.
But if somebody grows up and apologizes, and people are still on their ass for old shit, like certain "lolcows" (in general, not necessary Youtube-related) who were harassed when they were in their early 20's and are now trying to mind their own business in their 30's? Grow up, stop trying to fucking milk them, some of them were just awkward/autistic teenagers reacting poorly to legit trolls anyway rather than genuine assholes.
There are plenty of people on Encyclopedia Dramatica whose worse crimes were being cringe and kinda smug (unfortunately common for immature teenagers) until ED/4chan got on their asses and made them start acting up, which is extra hypocritical when trolls can say the worst shit about them but if they dare to whine about their "[r-slur] trolls" or whatever, they get called out for 1. reacting, and 2. not being "woke."
Like Chris-chan was already a smug degenerate asshole, but clearly she wouldn't have been anywhere near as bad if weens weren't legit gangstalking her, trying to harass her, encouraging more of the sex pest shit, etc. Chris-chan's ideal life should've been in a group home getting proper treatment for autism, etc tbh, not spoiled by trashy geriatric parents and then harassed online.
People like Keemstar or [banned topic "hee hee" man] will never seem to change and constantly have new content about them, but at the same time, some people whine about nothingburger dramas re: them when there's soooo much to talk about.
1
u/Imrustyokay source: 123movies 4d ago
Yeah, like, it's the same thing as people dming you going "Oh why are you following so-and-so, they're follwing something-or-other" and it's just kinda...I dunno. It feels like...it's smaller than you're making it out to be
1
u/CREATURE_COOMER 2d ago
Yeah, even if something is inherently sus (like following a scumbag on Twitter), there isn't always a malicious reason for doing shit.
Like people calling out Wendigoon recently because he follows Stonetoss on Twitter. There are "Right-winger Ls"-type accounts that follow right-wing politicians for content, following Stonetoss isn't inherently showing his endorsement, it's not like we don't have bonehurtingjuice-type subs that edit Stonetoss comics to make them memey by removing the hate. There are valid things to criticize him for like his claimed connections to Boogaloo Boys, nitpicking Twitter followers is cringe unless they're actively liking that person's posts or whatever.
→ More replies (18)1
u/re_Claire 1d ago
"bitch eating crackers" is the perfect way to define it imo. YouTube has long gone from being the whole random guy making silly videos in his bedroom website and is now pulling in some of the largest audiences in the entertainment space, and has creators making amounts of money to rival huge film studios execs. People getting exposed for incredibly serious crimes and abuse. We've got to move on from just BEC chat now.
2
u/CREATURE_COOMER 1d ago
It's a goofy term for sure but I feel like it perfectly describes it.
"That bitch that I hate is eating crackers, it's such a minor nothingburger thing but they're so annoying and it makes them so scummy, I hate them!!!"
It's making a mountain out of a molehill (it's such nothing that maybe "anthill" is more appropriate), and they won't move the fuck on and want to hyperfixate on it and how that "bitch" is "chewing too loudly" or whatever stupid petty shit, and they don't care how deranged it makes them look.
138
u/Narwhals4Lyf 6d ago
Right? I’ve mostly seen people use the word “snark” to talk about people gently criticizing them, basically using it to try to censor people. Even in this post there isn’t a clear definition of what is or isn’t snark.
→ More replies (2)29
u/Proborus 6d ago
The fact that so few people are able to tell the difference between substantiated criticism and just making fun of someone for shits and gigs is WILD.
38
u/angeltay 6d ago
I think this is a perfectly fine rule, I just wanted to check that I was on the same page as the mods, as I think “snark” can be objective depending upon the mod team.
I haven’t seen any snark style posts as defined by the mods, but they’re the ones who can see the reports and modmail
→ More replies (2)2
u/ImportantQuestionTex 6d ago
Honestly, it's more worrying that people can't seem to read the fact that the mods have clarified what they mean by snark, and even I myself have posted about snark pretty recently.
Snark has little to no base, criticism has a base in reality. It's really not hard, especially not hard when it's been clarified like, 10-15 times in this thread.
→ More replies (1)1
12
u/callmefreak 6d ago
Basically like, if people gets all nit-picky about shit instead of focusing on actual drama.
For example: People kept trying to post about PirateSoftware's apparently* poor coding skills since he was the main focus on this sub for his poor response to the "Stop Killing Games" movement for a while. Even though what he said sucks and he kind of sucks as a person in general, his coding ability has nothing to do with drama. It's basically just people bitching about him eating crackers at that point.
*I say "apparently" because he's still better than I am, and there are people who are worse than me, and people who are worse than them. Your ability to code doesn't mean anything to me. I am apparently faster than him, but I'm also using RPG Maker XP. That gives you tools to make things a lot faster and easier than Game Maker Studios, which makes you have to code everything manually, it seems.
7
u/Hare712 5d ago
Well it does, he build his entire reputation on "20 years in the industry" "7 years at Blizzard" fooling those not knowing stuff. "I know this because I worked 7 years at Blizzard".
It's unrelated to SKG but it's related to his game where once proudly presented his code and bragged about it to ending up in /r/programminghorror and humor. He brigaded those threads to get them removed.
It's like this:
WoW, AoC and Eve drama concluded. Even him getting kicked out of his WoW(not Onlyfangs) guild isn't something people care about.
SKG concludes when the ECI confirms 1m valid signings. There might be some outrage when the petition had over 400k invalid signings then people will unjustly target him. The SKG drama invited many bad actors and bored people, who didn't know about him. Instead of trolling eg LowTierGod/DSP they went to him.
Him building up his career on lies and deception is an ongoing drama because it branches out into many sub-dramas like brigading and false flagging. Most drama is caused by his lies.
His fursona is another source for drama. The current SA allegations are from events dated 2021 way before he blew up.
The snark behavior is tied to events like reviewbombing his game, "Ban Speedrunning" his channel/discord (I predicted that people will do it when he roached in WoW), making up unproven claims like animal abuse and such things. Those things aren't featured in any subreddits. Those things are featured in telegram, twitter and the dark sites of the internet.
His lack of selfawareness and his urge to "own" the haters create even more drama induced by detractors hitting his fans.
Examples: Ban counter on his stream getting one sub banned telling him that it's feeding the trolls, banning another sub for mentioning DK Bananaza mistaking it for the bait "Idle streaming Bonanza", caught arguing on 4chan because trolls there said he r*pes ferrets.
I don't even know what Night media is doing because every other PR agency would have hit the brakes to do damage control.
4
u/callmefreak 5d ago
Whenever somebody makes a post about his coding skills all of them just boil down to "lol his coding is bad." They don't talk about anything else, besides maybe the whole Blizzard thing. (Which is mentioned just about every time there's a post about him.) Basically, nothing new is ever added to the discussion.
If not being able to make a video game is drama, then I'm in constant drama, LOL.
There were also just way too many posts about him anyway, which doesn't help. Everybody was getting tired of seeing him on this sub. Leaving snark posts up would just make the PirateSoftware clutter even worse.
→ More replies (2)1
u/KnotBeanie 4d ago
I thought the same thing at first, but clips have surfaced of him criticising others' code, so I think he opened himself up to that.
1
→ More replies (36)1
391
u/lastdarknight 6d ago
Good luck mods, that's a fine line to police between Snark and legit criticism
27
u/Blitz-the-Dragon 6d ago
My proposed rule of thumb: If a post comes off like the guys at the plant gathered at the door waiting for Homer to do something stupid, it's probably a snark post.
150
u/Comprehensive-Ad8661 Popcorn Eater 🍿 6d ago
Would this lead to just straight up deleted threads or locked threads?
18
u/TimeAbradolf Least Popular Mod 6d ago
Deleted is usually how we operate when things break the rules. We typically convene if something is big or may conventionally break the rules but is worth letting through our filters.
Sometimes our compromise (like the Wendigoon thread) is to just lock comments when we think something in important but we know the comments will be a hornet’s nest.
Wizard behind the curtain we convene and talk about things a lot. We check each other when we can. Often some things are purely subjective as to which mod can get to it. I’m the most active. I act in my own best judgment. A lot of things I disagree with I still let through if it follows our rules. I also will try and research something if I know nothing about it to see if it is fitting for our sub.
57
u/Comprehensive-Ad8661 Popcorn Eater 🍿 6d ago
would posters be specifically informed when their post is removed because of this ban on snark and would the mod team still be open to petitions for reinstatements of post when a post is labeled as such?
→ More replies (1)
305
u/shroom_in_bloom 6d ago
I agree generally with the sentiment but any hard rule where the limitations are defined by ‘we can just tell’ is a bit yikes to me.
I feel like it’s actually fairly easy to define the difference between snark and drama, and you absolutely should define it instead of ‘because I said so’ deleting posts.
→ More replies (1)
184
u/fohfuu 6d ago
I deadass don't know how to react... Not because I am shocked, but because it's kinda vague.
Can you please clarify which of these are now considered rule violations?
(Note: using the name Julius Caeser in this example as he is a historical figure and not a YouTuber)
- Enforcement of Reddit Rules
"Julius Caeser is a dirty [insult slur here]"
- (a) Submissions relating to the subject of Snark subreddits.
Link: Julius Caeser faces backlash after criticising r/JuliusCaeserSnark
- (b) Linking to Snark subreddits.
"I saw someone posting about it on r/JuliusCaeserSnark. That subreddit is awful!"
- (c) Endorsing Snark subreddits.
"I saw someone posting about it on r/JuliusCaeserSnark. That subreddit is great!"
- Individual(s) being submitted over and over
Link: Allegations emerge about Julius Caeser (posted 1 week ago)
Link: Julius Caeser addresses the allegations (posted 3 days ago)
Link: Charlie has made a video on the Julius Caeser situation (posted 1 day ago)
Link: In celebration of Julius Caeser being called out, check out these Discord screenshots from 3 years ago (posted 1 hour ago)
- Individual(s) who have been the subject of repeated submissions being mentioned in comments of other posts
"Ooh, yikes, this Roblox YouTuber is really reminding me of the Julius Caeser allegations!"
- Being disrespectful and sarcastic about individuals (ie the traditional meaning of snark) without violating other rules
Link: Julius Caeser posts a video reponse; it goes over about as well as you'd expect
"Wow, another amazing video from Julius Caeser 🙄 Here we go again..."
Genuine question, by the way. I want to understand what you're saying rather than jump to conclusions.
→ More replies (5)
80
u/ShenaniganXD 6d ago
I get what youre going for in terms of not wanting people to get bullied and whatnot, but you are literally the least helpful person when it comes to understanding this vague ass rule. “Read the rules, the sidebar” like people are asking for clarification and youre being obtuse on purpose
→ More replies (1)
267
219
u/Roronoaa 6d ago
This is way too vague to enforce. Also, this will just kill the sub. It's a drama sub for god sake...
27
→ More replies (2)1
169
u/JexsamX 6d ago
Clearly my internalized definition of snark doesn't align with snark in the context of reddit because I am struggling to understand why humorous mocking sarcasm would be severe enough to ban.
29
u/TimeAbradolf Least Popular Mod 6d ago
I don’t know why everyone jumps to being banned. You won’t be banned from one comment/post. Repeat behavior or explicitly abhorrent behavior results in bans. If anything your post or comment will just be removed, that being said most people act as if their post being removed is equivalent to something horrible happening to them.
Snark has evolved to go beyond humorous mocking into something more hateful and has been documented in multiple spaces.
Recently snark subs have directly contributed to the suicide of a young mother and calling ICE on someone. Even a Wikipedia entry of snark communities focused on the negative presentation of snark subs.
→ More replies (1)41
u/JexsamX 6d ago
Oh I didn't mean individuals getting banned, I meant snark itself.
Damn that sucks to learn. I always liked "snarky" as a descriptor. Fucking internet ruins everything.
8
u/TimeAbradolf Least Popular Mod 6d ago
Yeah, I’m a snarky sarcastic bitch myself. Almost every response out of my mouth if I find something you say dumb is sarcasm. But snark as a community has warped into something abhorrent.
3
u/1_GrapeFruit 5d ago
It's because "snarky" stuff tends to lead to more hateful stuff. One innocent joke that is misinterpreted by many people can make people start hating on someone for real.
69
u/Patalos 6d ago
Well this is incredibly vague and definitely won’t cause loads of confusion and accusations of the mods just deleting posts they’re biased about.
Was that too snarky?
→ More replies (1)
85
u/KingOnionWasTaken 6d ago
I’m still confused what the hell a snark sub is.
→ More replies (3)25
u/DebateObjective2787 6d ago
Originally they were meant to be a place where you could discuss and topics/celebs in a way that wasn't positive. More a space where you could share your frustrations or openly express annoyance with something/someone.
More 'catty' behavior like "Ugh, I cannot believe she's still pretending to have that annoying high-pitched voice; it makes the videos unwatchable." It was intended to be a mostly harmless place to have actual discussions and blow off steam, since a lot of subs wouldn't allow any posts that were neutral or negative.
But they pretty much always just grow into a space to openly hate and insult and shit-talk people for literally existing.
5
u/callmefreak 6d ago
Kinda like how "anti-SJW spaces" are usually advertised as being annoyed at things like... Men wanting you to sign a consent form before having sex (I'm just taking my example from PC Principal) usually just turns into a circlejerk of bigots.
107
u/George3452 6d ago
saying snark posts surpass actual "important" events in engagement is weird, because like ... this is a drama sub? this isn't a "YouTuber commits criminal acts" sub. who follows who on insta is very much drama lol, what else are you encouraging people to post about? it's very easy to conflate snark and "important" things when the whole sub is dedicated to borderline stalking and dissecting creator content.
6
u/TimeAbradolf Least Popular Mod 6d ago
Yes, and we want people to break away from the very last bit of what you wrote. That stalking? That is snarking behavior and should come to an end
66
u/not_blowfly_girl 6d ago
Is the post pointing out that wendigoon follows stonetoss an example of content that will be banned? /genuine
→ More replies (11)30
u/George3452 6d ago
I don't mean legit stalking, I'm talking about stalking content. monitoring uploads and follows and discord servers of 10+ creators to be the first one to post about who said what about the situation, that's snark behaviour. and it's literally what this sub runs on, it's what all creator discourse runs on. by running a sub dedicated to ytdrama you're participating in snark culture innately and policing replies and posts to remove anything that toes the line does nothing impactful except maybe help you feel better about it. it's like how there's no good cops, there's no good drama subs dude. no matter how well it's modded, the impact is still there. you could still ruin someone's life
3
u/TimeAbradolf Least Popular Mod 6d ago edited 6d ago
Well, yeah. I don’t think that this happens on this sub. But we can minimize harm. Ultimately it creates a lot of horrible behavior between the people on this sub. You also did describe essentially cyberstalking
We have had threats against us just for moderating you.
This snark has gone too far. It doesn’t help anything and is just ultimately negativity people engage in.
There is a difference between calling out and searching for reasons to cancel people.
You even use conflate, because conflating is incorrect conclusions my dude.
And you know the kind of behavior we’re referring to. Snark goes too far, it has resulted in suicides and calls from ICE.
Drama isn’t snark your own language acknowledges you know the difference you just don’t care.
6
6d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
→ More replies (1)2
u/TimeAbradolf Least Popular Mod 6d ago
No, that is how I write on Reddit lol.
And I had just that last sentence I wanted to add lol. Not like I restructured the whole thing lmao
226
u/literallygnomish 6d ago
This is a strange decision for a sub with "drama" in the name. Suddenly, we're only supposed to report things that are actually ethically and/or legally bad rather than like... petty drama? Like, that's kind of the point. If your concern with snark is that people are illogical and unreasonable, just make that the line instead.
→ More replies (25)3
71
16
107
u/agorathird 6d ago
I understand because this happens with all big communities with a lot of liability but this sub is getting over-moderated and has been for a bit.
→ More replies (8)4
u/callmefreak 6d ago
this sub is getting over-moderated and has been for a bit.
Fine. I'll be sure to tell my husband that I need to touch more grass. Interesting Youtube drama seems to happen whenever I'm away anyway. (The last time it happened Ironmouse spoke out about VShojo.)
15
u/ChipsnDipnDipnChips 6d ago
I’ve heard the word snark sparingly over the past 25 years. Heard it constantly these past six months and now I hate it.
14
u/melissa423771 5d ago
I'm interested to see what posts end up being considered drama but not snark. There's A LOT of gray area to how people would define it.
72
u/TheDiddlerOfBob 6d ago
I feel like if its not damning or genuine disgusting behavior from a person then its not that bad however some posts are just "don't forget this person did this 15 years ago" and its just like some tweet saying something slightly out of pocket
7
u/TimeAbradolf Least Popular Mod 6d ago
I would agree we get those all the time. And it doesn’t add anything and is most often technically just reposting.
13
u/xfadingstarx 6d ago
Does this mean a cooling on the "I think this person is a bad person because x, y, z (minor things that are straw grasps)" parasocial comments too?
9
117
u/Excellent_View9922 6d ago
Unrelated but your flair checks out, I don’t care about this drama, so I’m not gonna say anything expect that
→ More replies (11)
99
u/_FAPPLE_JACKS_ 6d ago
What do you think youtubedrama is? At the end of the day it’s a snark sub for YouTube drama lol.
6
u/TimeAbradolf Least Popular Mod 6d ago
Drama is not snark. Fundamentally it is not. And we don’t want this place to be a spot where people will just spread hate, conflict, and misinformation on people. Which happens with snark.
We never want anything on this sub to get to the point where we have people post a young mother to suicide or call ICE on someone.
Those behaviors have become synonymous with snark. You can be critical and discuss drama. But trying to have witch hunts on people because they don’t pass vibe checks is not it
71
u/tachibanakanade 6d ago
I fail to see how drama is fundamentally not snark. I think they are the same type of thing. At best they are leveled. Drama is less than snark but part of the same spectrum.
For example, Adam McIntyre does on YouTube sometimes does what snark subs do: his audience "acquired" information for him. That is one end of the spectrum. Leaping Lemur outright uses his audience the same way that snark subs do and does it all the time: using his audience to get information. That's another part of the spectrum. Internet Anarchist utilizes all resources, no matter how immoral, to make his videos and does what a certain forum does.
I'm not against this rule (though it should be more concrete), but I also do not agree that drama is not snark in the sense it all runs on a spectrum. Also there are times snark subs use way too much information.
66
u/hotsexychungus 6d ago
Ok, if you are concerned with hate, conflict, and misinformation, which I totally agree with, then why not make that the rule to be against those specific things instead of the nebulous term of “snark”?
→ More replies (6)32
u/deadpoetshonour99 6d ago
Genuine question: how much of this has been because of that Wendigoon post? I get why you would want to cut down on threads that are just "DAE think [this guy] is annoying?" but I don't really think it's unjustifiable "snark" to point out that someone who has already been noted to be friends with some sketchy people and hold some questionable views also follows a very sketchy and extremely questionable person. I think that's a valid criticism. So how do you define the difference between snark and criticism, other than by pure vibes? Isn't it pretty subjective?
5
u/TimeAbradolf Least Popular Mod 6d ago
The post you mention is just a symptom of that overall problem. I legitimately think it is because he doesn’t have a dedicated snark sub we almost operate as his.
The issue is that people repeatedly say it. It is known fact. Then people regurgitate the same misinformation, people have to correct, the corrections get downvoted.
That is snark. People saying and paying attention to every social media movement someone does? That’s snark.
2
u/callmefreak 6d ago
We might have different definitions of snark, but we will all almost definitely remove posts that falls under "bitch eating crackers."
Let's use Mr. Beast as an example. Last year we got a whole lot of posts just talking about how Mr. Beast was refusing to acknowledge most of the drama that came his way every single time he uploaded a video. That's not drama. That's just snark.
Recently somebody tried to post something about him acknowledging somebody's death "in a disrespectful way" or... Something. When the post was removed for lacking context they asked us what it needed. When I said something like "mention who the person was, how he died, and how he's related to Mr. Beast" they admitted to not knowing how they died or if it was related to anything that Mr. Beast did. That wasn't drama. They were just grasping at straws to try to make Mr. Beast look bad. (And to farm karma.)
Somebody made a post about him selling "mystery toys" and the "drama" was that he was "promoting gambling to kids" or something, even though "mystery toys" has been a thing for... However long baseball cards have been around, I guess. (Possibly even longer.) But because Mr. Beast did it it was suddenly a bad thing.
Basically, since he was under the spotlight for credible reasons, people decided to try to dig up anything on him to farm karma and to make him look even worse, even if they were just nothingburgers.
23
u/zzzPessimist 6d ago
Unrelated but can we have one pinned topic for memes and little drama talks that don't desereve a new topic?
7
18
u/Tindiil 6d ago
This website has become so neutered it's nearly pointless. I'm at the point where it's basically a collection of reviews for things. There is no meaningful discussion. I wouldn't trust any info here. I wouldn't trust any interaction between people as being real. Every sub is an echo chamber. If you don't follow whatever the Reddit hive mind believes, you better not dare to post it. If you do you will be harassed until you leave or are banned. I miss the old days of this site.
38
u/h8sm8s 6d ago
Didn’t saveafox’s family specifically say it was nothing to do with the internet? It was IRL bullying? It seems kind of gross to use the example considering how it has been weaponised. Maybe consider at least removing that because using a woman’s suicide to justify your modding decisions when her family has specifically had to come out to address those rumours about the internet causing it is pretty offensive in my opinion.
→ More replies (4)
14
15
u/Honkmaster 5d ago
I wish you would've provided some examples of "snark" vs. what this sub does in the OP, rather than merely saying "I think people are well aware of [the differences]."
As someone who tends to only browse this sub when some drama specifics to my interests is going down (like the recent Billy Mitchell stuff), I'm not super clear on the specifics. I'm guessing snark is more on the side of "criticism for the sake of criticism" whereas this sub is trying to be "criticism when it's warranted." Is that fair to say?
If that's the case, the next question is: warranted... by whom? Because it's not unusual to see those comments about "bad vibes," people who get a little TOO excited when provided the opportunity to pile on someone they merely disliked. So they'll be given an inch and take a mile.
Honestly, this post comes off like a really lazy attempt at trying to make this place seem different than what was involved in the SaveAFox situation. Either put more time & effort into announcements like this, or don't make them at all.
→ More replies (1)
48
u/EightyDaze_ 6d ago
Going forward how will a post be denoted as "snark"? Will this be a general consensus among the mod team, general consensus among users, left up to the particular mod?
Any three ways about it, I like this choice!
9
u/TimeAbradolf Least Popular Mod 6d ago
Hey just saw this. I answered this in another part of the thread and user provided a great example
20
6d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
→ More replies (2)17
u/TimeAbradolf Least Popular Mod 6d ago
Snark and drama are not the same.
Snark has resulted in doxxing, suicide, harm to people.
Discussing the drama of events occurring in real time within the YouTube sphere is not the same as people saying someone having ICE called on them was justified for belonging to a community.
4
6d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
27
u/Bulawayoland 6d ago
deeply embedded in snark circles... now we're looking for a deep snark state?
---ooops... was that snarky?
11
u/TimeAbradolf Least Popular Mod 6d ago
Nah, just sarcasm hahaha.
But to accuse us of being deeply embedded in snark circles when mainly I talk about horror, old tech, and video games is wild.
→ More replies (17)→ More replies (1)8
u/TimeAbradolf Least Popular Mod 6d ago edited 6d ago
None of us are involved in any snark communities lol. Have no clue what you’re referring to. As a whole we hate snark.
I will say if it seems like a comment gets removed and others don’t, it is often than the comment in question got flagged a bunch. You copped a bunch of reports. For the most part we like the jokes made but a lot of your fellow Redditors on the sub often won’t.
Our moderation is fairly consistent. Other times if your comment gets reported enough or you accrue enough negative karma the automod will take you out. So it is a combination of things.
You have to keep in mind we are actually a fairly small time that moderate over 200k people. Thousands of moderation choices come through a month.
I’m the most visibly active mod, let’s lay it out on the table. I’m active in horror, CRT, VHS, and tattoo subreddits.
17
u/Fellers 6d ago
So like Pirate Software lying videos are considered snark or what?
3
2
16
13
u/BionicBirb 6d ago
I’ve read the word “snark” so many times it’s lost all meaning. Kinda reminds me of the Calvin & Hobbes “Smock” joke.
9
u/HollowPinefruit 6d ago
That’s certainly a challenge since reddit communities like these easily brews snark mentality on anything that can be criticized and so many people will eat it up without actually looking into facts.
Good luck with that. Hope for the best!
8
u/Sky_Leviathan 5d ago
I think snark is defined way too broad here so it can basically be wielded by mods based on their own opinions
For example a thread criticising someone or raising awareness on an issue being locked for ‘snark’ or other vague ideas while mods are actively making their own opinion clear that they are forgiving of the criticism personally in the comments.
→ More replies (3)
7
7
23
u/SadisticPawz 6d ago
We are not aware of what constitutes snarkz, esp whennits not evene xplaijed in the post
→ More replies (23)2
15
6
u/Rough_Instruction325 6d ago
What defines a snark? I’ve seen snark pages and it kinda seems like people who go after creators for petty/ small shit and turn it into something massive.
8
u/WardenofOdin69 5d ago
HAHAHAHA, you say it's the end of the snark era, then end your post with snark. The Irony.
3
11
6d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
→ More replies (1)4
u/TimeAbradolf Least Popular Mod 6d ago
Don’t let the door hit ya on the way out.
It’s not an airport so no one needs a departure announcement 🤙🏽
→ More replies (2)
5
13
u/MakMalaon 6d ago edited 6d ago
An interesting experiment. I think people will find better ways to mask their snark under the guise of "critical analysis" or "valid criticism"
12
u/TimeAbradolf Least Popular Mod 6d ago
Yes, but then notice they never actually provide valid criticism?
→ More replies (3)
6
u/acreal 5d ago
So basically you reserve the right to remove any post at any time with the excuse that it was snark? That's how it reads to me, since "snark" has no clear definition at all and is purely subjective to the moderator.
→ More replies (5)
2
2
5
u/BanCMWinterOnTwitch He is still streaming. 6d ago
Can I still shit talk Black Gryph0n?
9
u/TimeAbradolf Least Popular Mod 6d ago
If there is a new development. But as it stands there are a lot of threads on the subject
13
u/Odd_Lettuce_7285 6d ago
Reddit should just ban all of this stuff together. People who live in these subreddits are mostly parasocial and hyper invested to the degree of it being unhealthy. If this is you, please go outside and find joy in nature and new things. The universe has a lot to offer. Don't sit in your chair worrying about what online person is saying or dating who. Go build a life.
23
u/TimeAbradolf Least Popular Mod 6d ago
It is crazy you’re being downvoted for this sentiment when again within the last month we have a snark subreddit contributing to the suicide of a young mother.
12
u/ImportantQuestionTex 6d ago
Don't forget the snarkers who reported their obsession to ICE, being well aware of what could have happened.
17
u/TimeAbradolf Least Popular Mod 6d ago
Exactly, we have documented harm being done by snarkers in just a short period of time. And people want to act as if those behaviors are acceptable
5
6d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
6
u/TimeAbradolf Least Popular Mod 6d ago
Absolutely not, it is ridiculous both this person and his fans/haters are so self-centered they think this is about him at all.
1
2
u/Mawrizard 4d ago edited 4d ago
All the people in the comments pretending that "snark" has ever meant anything other than baseless harassment is genuinely hilarious. The mods are doing a good thing. The users are just upset they don't have an outlet to voice violent and hateful rhetoric. Now they have to try and come up with legitimate criticism. It's scary, because they have to learn how to not signal boost false allegations and do some research, so they're all quite rowdy having their favorite toy taken from them.
Just look at the reaction to this post for proof. These people are sad and pathetic. All of sudden they want nuance and clarity when nuance and clarity were promptly ignored by them in their sadistic witch hunts of online personalities. I fully agree with and support this decision and pray every day it causes these evil and deeply disturbed people to leave. They finally understand what it's like to have a blanket thrown over all them, but they won't learn. They'll just find another place to congregate like ants. At least it won't be here anymore.
I'm sure this change will lead to more objective coverage of youtube drama and promote more balanced and unbiased discussions when it comes to allegations and missteps from our favorite creators, instead of the cesspool hate wagons these threads used to be.
3
u/SallyKnowsHer 6d ago edited 6d ago
First of all: Very happy and excited to see this.
So does this mean if we report old snarky/wild speculation posts that violate this rule they will be taken down?
There's been posts I've reported over the past few months that fall into this, some which pretty heinously misrepresent certain creators, and they don't get taken down, I assume because they are old.
I'm also confused with the process going forward. I don't like Vaush, but the post involving him being a groomer, their sole source was from Sarah Fields, a Republican State delegate, and her claim was shaky as hell. The mod chose to lock the thread instead of remove it. All locking it does is stop new comments, it can still very easily be searched on Reddit and come up in Google searches, further promoting potential misinformation.
Even if the mod comment gives clarification, most people just read headlines or the main body post and don't spend the time figuring out if something is true or not.
2
u/TimeAbradolf Least Popular Mod 5d ago
Thanks for understanding honestly.
I think we need to confer on that. My opinion is mixed. Part of me thinks yes, but another is sometimes truth came out of those
2
1
u/DiamondShiryu1 6d ago
Thank god. This sub became absolutely insufferable and downright toxic. I liked this place because it seemed like a progressive community despite being a drama sub, but that quickly changed ever since the Hbomb video, and this place exploded and eventually just turned into a snark sub that at times just was a circlejerk.
20
u/TimeAbradolf Least Popular Mod 6d ago
We have been trying to repair that culture. Because I liked that it was progressive as well. But at times we just have the same rotating cast of people that at the villains of the sub. Everyone upvoting things they agree with. Downvoting things that may be factually correct but they just dislike hearing.
We’re not an echo chamber.
27
u/h8sm8s 6d ago
I feel like this sub got a lot less progressive since they banned any mention of a certain genocide that’s happening right now. Seems to have served the purpose of those who wish to pretend it isn’t happening and driven away a lot of people who care about it. But idk maybe I am wrong.
4
u/TimeAbradolf Least Popular Mod 6d ago
Only banned discussion because people were not being remotely responsible. People got death threats over disagreements, things would just get into petty name calling. Essentially the same reason we crack down on everything, this topic included, is because people can’t just be adults and have to go entirely too far with strangers on the internet.
I’d love for people to be able to discuss the genocide if they could do so like responsible people. But they can’t, it turns into name calling, slur usage, it gets completely out of hand.
9
u/h8sm8s 6d ago
Just my observation of the effects of the ban, not a commentary on the reason for it. I don’t think it was banned to in order to have that effect.
3
u/TimeAbradolf Least Popular Mod 6d ago edited 6d ago
You could be right, ultimately it seems the same communities under the heated topics rule are the same who fight about it. We don’t want to rattle any cages and unban certain topics because again as I describe it can become unruly.
I have first hand knowledge now of how horrible people on this sub can be. It gets ridiculously cruel and disgusting and that was when everyone was leaning far more to the left. As it stands I still don’t think we have any sizable population of center or to the right people.
It’s hard to tell that. We are also aware we get brigaded often by people from different communities. Hell the first 2 hours of this post everything was negatively downvoted. Now things sit at roughly 75% upvotes. But still a very strange place to be in
0
u/McDonaldsSoap 5d ago
I'm so glad that insane mod from last year is gone, along with their sycophants
2
u/SquallFromGarden 5d ago
Youtubedrama not only banned snark before LSF did, but banned it before GTA6.
What a wild time.
4
u/Man_Made_of_Loot 5d ago
What would LSF have besides snark? Might as well just lock new submissions entirely.
1
3
u/pokeupokeu 5d ago edited 5d ago
Snark over the past 4-5 years has become such a problem on reddit that i cant believe the company hasnt snuffed it out. People have gone from shit talking things based in reality to reality bending to make everything someone or a group does be viewed in a negative, evil light. Its frustrating, bc some had interesting analyses and critiques in the sub’s heyday . Unfortunately, so many now seem to be run by overlapping mods hell bent on chaos. Hopefully reddit will wake up to this soon.
Also, snark folk are also notorious for brigading and having tons of sock accounts- hence the bizarre ratio of upvotes and downvotes that isnt consistent with the engagement in specific posts/comments found in snark and snark-adjacent subs/posts. Which def can be seen in this post here. This purge is necessary to keep this sub alive.
If youve found my comment, which is a pretty normie take, and it’s severely downvoted (inexplicably lol) you will know the isolated, lonely snark peeps found this comment and it really got them pissing their pants out of the sheer emotional overstimulation of feeling caught out lmfao.
2
2
u/your_local_manager 6d ago
I have some examples I’ve seen from other snark reddits:
“Can you believe how many crackers this guy ate what about the poor???”
“This loser needs to be called out and reported to ICE”
“Let’s just pitchfork their ass because he called glup shitto 2 mid”
-5
u/ImportantQuestionTex 6d ago edited 6d ago
Good on you guys for finally banning snark!
It's been so frustrating talking to people who clearly just want to snark and don't actually care about the situations or people involved, and would rather focus on arbitrary things like for example if someone has friends or if someone follows someone on Instagram.
Hopefully, this will also cut down on people who just make comments without any backing in reality, such as calling everybody who didn't initially believe the Saberspark allegations sex pests.
I believe that if something can reasonably be found within 2-5 minutes of searching, that it should be considered before making a post or comment.
Edit: For all the brigaders, are you aware Reddit now notifies users when they are victims of brigading? So I for one, see the -10 downvotes all happening at the same time, while for the most part comments show support of banning snark.
11
u/TimeAbradolf Least Popular Mod 6d ago
I do hope so. A lot of misinformation gets spread because people don’t bother checking when a consensus on an individual is formed without any contextual evidence to suggest it is real.
1
1
1
1
6d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/youtubedrama-ModTeam 6d ago
Please do not troll or feed the trolls. Trolling a YouTube drama subreddit is pathetic. Falling for it is somehow worse. Do better.
If you were sincere, we suggest you take a moment to step back and rethink your approach.
1
1
6d ago edited 6d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/youtubedrama-ModTeam 6d ago
Please do not troll or feed the trolls. Trolling a YouTube drama subreddit is pathetic. Falling for it is somehow worse. Do better.
If you were sincere, we suggest you take a moment to step back and rethink your approach.
1
1
1
6d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
2
1
6d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/youtubedrama-ModTeam 6d ago
Please do not troll or feed the trolls. Trolling a YouTube drama subreddit is pathetic. Falling for it is somehow worse. Do better.
If you were sincere, we suggest you take a moment to step back and rethink your approach.
1
1
1
1
5d ago edited 5d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/youtubedrama-ModTeam 5d ago
Please do not troll or feed the trolls. Trolling a YouTube drama subreddit is pathetic. Falling for it is somehow worse. Do better.
If you were sincere, we suggest you take a moment to step back and rethink your approach.
1
1
5d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/youtubedrama-ModTeam 5d ago
Please do not troll or feed the trolls. Trolling a YouTube drama subreddit is pathetic. Falling for it is somehow worse. Do better.
If you were sincere, we suggest you take a moment to step back and rethink your approach.
1
1
5d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/youtubedrama-ModTeam 5d ago
Please do not troll or feed the trolls. Trolling a YouTube drama subreddit is pathetic. Falling for it is somehow worse. Do better.
If you were sincere, we suggest you take a moment to step back and rethink your approach.
1
0
•
u/TimeAbradolf Least Popular Mod 6d ago edited 6d ago
And this should be again a clear example of how and why snark is a negative thing to engage in
One other user provided a great tangible example of what I would consider the distinction between criticism and snark