The people who upvoted things that shouldn't be upvoted are the problem. They may never notice that it was removed anyway.
So now the subreddit (which may only have 15,000 users) has to staff dozens of moderators just to keep track of the shit.
And those posts still polluted the subreddit. They can't be instantaneously removed.
> Why do you suppose that is?
Because in groups of thousands and tens of thousands of people, there's always someone who thinks not only was the meme post funny, but that everyone should lighten up and allow it anyway.
They argue publicly in a pseudo-anonymous forum. And you can't make them stop either, or even more backlash occurs. Nor can you remain silent, or out-argue them.
So a flame war erupts, and everything goes off-topic even more.
> An upvote can mean "like", or "on topic", or "contributes to the discussion", or about 20 other positive things. A downvote can have just as many other meanings in the other direction. The other thing is that with multireddits and /r/all, "on-topic-ness" isn't even going to be evaluated by the users
Unless those users are punished for failing to evaluate.
If you're going to run a community like that, why even have the people there in the first place? What you've just described is a blog.
If you are referring to the "Unless those users are punished for failing to evaluate."
I think that was meant to mean "unless those users are punished for not distinguishing whether the thing was in an appropriate location, and therefore upvoting something which does not belong where it is."
Not sure, but seems like a likely interpretation to me.
Lock the thread (with AutoModerator) and explain why. No need to disappear it.
Over time, people submitting good content stop doing so, and people who submit bad content start doing it more. Vicious circle.
Is this really the case? It's a common complaint, but it's usually presented without any backing. Why is the content necessarily "bad" if the community has chosen to feature it?
Mods can't just delete those posts either, because this reddit gets pissy that they're playing favorites.
Why do you suppose that is?
It would be better if the mods were able to say "if you think this is upvoteworthy for this subreddit, you are no longer welcome here".
Leaving aside the fact that you literally just advocated for thought crime, the problem is that an upvote can mean multiple things.
(Don't say "reddiqutte" either, I'm talking about use in reality)
An upvote can mean "like", or "on topic", or "contributes to the discussion", or about 20 other positive things. A downvote can have just as many other meanings in the other direction. The other thing is that with multireddits and /r/all, "on-topic-ness" isn't even going to be evaluated by the users unless you're looking at the front page of the community itself.
I really don't see how more covert moderation is a valid answer to abuse of non-covert moderation.