Changes highlighted in italics:

  1. Instance rules apply.
  2. [New] Be reasonable, constructive, and conductive to discussion.
  3. [Updated] Stay on-topic, specially for more divisive subjects. Avoid unnecessarily mentioning topics and individuals prone to derail the discussion.
  4. [Updated] Post sources whenever reasonable to do so. And when sharing links to paywalled content, provide either a short summary of the content or a freely accessible archive link.
  5. Avoid crack theories and pseudoscientific claims.
  6. Have fun!

What I’m looking for is constructive criticism for those rules. In special for the updated rule #3.

Thank you!

EDIT: feedback seems overwhelmingly positive, so I’m implementing the changes now. Feel free to use this thread for any sort of metadiscussion you want. Thank you all for the feedback!

  • Lvxferre [he/him]@mander.xyzOPM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    9 days ago

    You mean stuff like this, right?

    This sort of stuff is mildly discouraged. People are probably better off sharing it in !linguistics_humor@sh.itjust.works instead. But as long as there’s some room for genuine discussion or info sharing about language, I won’t remove it. Because, yes, rule 5 (nobody likes “stop having fun!!1one” style e-jannies).

    Note that neither @fossilesque@mander.xyz nor me are too strict on the rules. For example I’d rather tell users “don’t do this” than to temp-ban users.

    Thank you for bringing this up!