r/teenagers • u/YawnMcie 17 | Reddit Team Leader • Sep 01 '26
Mod [mod] Tightening requirements for political submissions
r/teenagers is not a political subreddit, and we never intend to be. However, in this current day and age, it is important for teenagers to discuss such topics. So while we aren't a political subreddt, we don't intend to restrict political posts.
However, it's become quite clear that that same idea of "[not] intending to restrict political posts." also does some harm. We don't currently have any rules surrounding such posts because it was never an intended talking point of this subreddit. This lack of proper guardrails has lead to an influx of falsified news, biased writeups, harmful rhetoric, etc.
Because of this, we're changing a few things.
1. Introducing a new flair
This flair will be appropriately named Political/Current Events. All submissions that fall under the umbrella of politics, and submissions that reference any notable current event, must assign this flair. Failure to do so will result in post removal.
Of course, to know when to assign that flair, you must know what counts as political. Politics doesn't solely mean government. Some examples of what would be considered political are:
- Government: Elections, legislation, government agencies, politicians, public officials, and foreign policy.
- Social and Ideological Issues: Public debates on civil rights, economic policy, war, identity, ideologies, public health, etc.
If you feel a post falls under the political umbrella, it probably does. Posts that also touch on certain current events are to be assigned this flair. The two often bleed into each other. Some examples of what would be considered a notable current event are:
- Breaking & Developing News Stories: These invite rapid speculation, unverified rumors, and rage-bait-esque remarks before facts are verified.
- Events Involving Public Officials or Institutions: Any current event involving heads of state, local government officials, law enforcement agencies, or legislative bodies.
With the introduction of a dedicated flair, it allows users to filter out political posts. We've been asked this a bit, so this is a fair middle ground to allow hiding, without totally restricting. On the flipside, it does also allow users to solely filter by political posts, which is a slippery slope. This is where some guardrails are introduced:
2. Karma requirements
From this point on, there'll be a community karma requirement to create or participate under Political/Current Events submissions. We won't share the threshold for obvious reasons, but it isn't egregious. The main purpose behind it is to prevent bad actors with un-established accounts, or some unwanted visitors from r/all from barging in and behaving in an uncivil manner.
Gaining subreddit karma is as easy as participating. It's easier for us to trust that you wont do harm if you show us.
3. Titles must be neutral
All titles under this umbrella, whether a discussion post or a screenshot of an article must be framed in a neutral manner. Neutality means the title answers simple, factual questions (who, what, where, and when).
Adding subjective adjectives, assigning motives (the why), using loaded language, and/or inserting personal commentary in a post title will violate this rule, leading to a post removal.
Also on the topic of neutrality:
4. Posts referencing a certain event MUST include a relevant, accessible, and verifiable source
Submissions will need to have a link in the body text or the image caption. This is to do away with unverified instagram screenshots, biased articles, and blatant lies. If referencing something, prove it is real. This also helps users do their own research and come to their own conclusions.
Users often also post events that occurred years ago. While not a "current event", they still typically fall under the umbrella. Providing links to events that occurred at any moment in time, whether current or not, is mandatory. This helps verify legitimacy, and can help inform users on when the issue occurred.
Lots of articles nowadays are paywalled. While paywalls usually indicate an article's quality, it is quite unrealistic to ask a subreddit of this demographic to pay for them. If a source you are attempting to use is locked behind any sort of payment, you must also provide a summary, either in the post caption or as a reply to Automod.
5. Political discussion posts will have a mandatory word count
It's nothing high, it's 100% achievable for those who actually want to discuss. This rule is in place to prevent one sentence rage posts and low effort commentary. Writing a few words does not offer enough context, and does not promote any meaningful discussion.
This only applies to text posts. Posts with an attached image aren't affected, often because the image contains enough context. Obviously don't use images to circumvent the word count.
That's all for now. Lot's of big changes that might take time to get used to. They will be in effect right away, and the flair should be visible to users as of now. Some rules will also be updated to reflect this.
Some parts of this may be changed depending on if it's too effective or not effective enough (karma requirements, word counts, automated vs manual checks). Nothing is ever set in stone, as mentioned at the beginning of this post we don't want to unnecessarily restrict political discussions.
Since this is a big change, feel free to leave any thoughts/critiques down below, or via modmail. Of course, please be reasonable with such comments, thank you!
- r/teenagers mod team
34
u/IAmCrocman888 16 Sep 01 '26
Is this is r/teenagers mods being productive and making a good rule!? I never thought I would see the dayā¦
12
u/YawnMcie 17 | Reddit Team Leader Sep 01 '26
sort of an overdue change but better late than never š¤
5
u/SpecialistFelt389 3,000,000 Attendee! Sep 02 '26
Donāt forget the banning selfies post, and the banning AI one
33
u/Igoontostalin 15 Sep 01 '26
This is a genuinely great idea over just fully banning it or the opposite of letting it run rampant thank you mods!!!!Ā
5
2
1
7
u/Sephraaah 17 Sep 01 '26
with social issues and such, at what point is that considered political? is someone ranting about how theyāre getting treated for being trans then political and they need to use the flair and keep it neutral? I would assume no, or else thatās a very clear issue with this rule
I imagine someone asking something like āwhat do you think about trans women in sports?ā would then be political, but what about someone ranting about that whole thing generally and talking about their own feelings and the arguments being rooted in transphobia? cause thatās more of a grey area I feel
8
u/YawnMcie 17 | Reddit Team Leader Sep 01 '26
personal experiences wouldnāt really fall under this. like using your example, it would be a very bad idea to force rants surrounding a trans personās experience to have the political flair. the existence of queer people is not political at all and it would be quite awful of us to insist otherwise
ātrans men in women sportsā is quite a social debate thats been thrown around in government positions as well, so that would be political
essentially, personal experiences donāt fall under this. since politics is systemic, one personās unique experience wouldnāt fit under that jurisdiction
4
u/Sephraaah 17 Sep 01 '26
why did it only now give the notification ššš
but then I assume itās somewhat lenient when itās about ranting then? like if someoneās ranting about transphobia and they mention things like the sports thing or wtv then that wouldnāt count as political?
2
u/KarahKat55 18 Sep 01 '26
Was wondering about this too. Lgbtq stuff gets iffy because some people consider it political and some donāt. Like you said, restricting general talking about lgbtq experiences could be a huge problem, but I see it being helpful with the ādo you agree with thisā type posts
9
6
3
2
u/mayainpuebla 16 Sep 01 '26
What do you guys as mods define as harmful rhetoric? What is the cut off?
9
u/YawnMcie 17 | Reddit Team Leader Sep 01 '26
any content made that dehumanizes, incites violence against, or promotes collective malice toward individuals or groups. for moderation purposes, harmful rhetoric is based on what the text actually does, rather than point of view
2
u/Miserable-Piglet9008 18 Sep 01 '26
With the influx of new rules does the mod team have plans to update the rules bookmark?
2
u/Mysterious--955 17 Sep 01 '26
Does the flower come before the spring or cores the spring come before the first frost or is it just a little bit of a bit of a bit of a bit of a cold winter cold spring and winter. Donāt you wish you saw the oddessey cause you ought to see what?
2
2
2
Sep 01 '26
[removed] ā view removed comment
6
u/YawnMcie 17 | Reddit Team Leader Sep 01 '26
might break our rules on low effort depending on the post content. the title itself is neutral enough to not warrant a removal on that basis
1
1
1
1
1
u/MinecraftCommander21 17 Sep 01 '26
Well I suppose this is a step in the right direction! I'd prefer an entire ban on politics but I suppose allowing them to stay up with some restrictions is good :)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/abbieeee_ 16 Sep 05 '26
So like, why do my posts get deleted and locked like brah what did I do š
2
u/YawnMcie 17 | Reddit Team Leader Sep 05 '26
reddit filters are flagging your account, you probably have a low CQS (which you can check in r/whatismycqs)
to fix this, add a verified email if you havenāt already. afterwards, try participating in casual conversation more often. avoid making posts/comments that are rule breaking in whatever subreddit, and content that will be mass downvoted (engaging in arguments). after a bit your account should be trusted more
in the meantime ive approved your recent post. any other post you make in the near future will probably also be removed temporarily
1
1
1
u/ItsJustJosiah 19 Sep 17 '26
Iāve seen mods straight up ban the topic and wipe their hands clean with it but this was such a mature route!!!
1
1
0
1
u/_Joeythegoat_ 18 Sep 01 '26
literally 1984
but like do posts abt lgbt issues follow these same rules bc im not sure i could be neutral but i dont wanna get banned š¤
3
u/YawnMcie 17 | Reddit Team Leader Sep 01 '26
hii!!! that kinda depends on what kind of issue. like obviously personal experiences arenāt political, so if the issue is something like āmy parents donāt support meā the political flair wouldnt fit
if the issue is more so about government (probably what youāre referring to), like discussing how election results may impact equality, a new legislation allowing/banning gender affirming care, or any systemic policy debates, then thatd warrant the flair
you wouldnt be banned for misusing flairs unless its obvious youāre trying to be malicious with it š¤š¤
2
u/_Joeythegoat_ 18 Sep 01 '26
hi hi hi yawn!! iām not a malicious guy iām just stupid sometimes šš
and yea ig i am referring to that in some type of way i just hate how me and my community is interlocked with politics ykwim so i might want to vent abt it sometimes ig or just show support to other ppl in my community with a post
1
1
1
-5
1
37
u/calculelt389 17 Sep 01 '26
Does this post break the rules?