I think the heavy moderation is a good thing. That way you get really high quality answers from people who actually know their shit. Not some one sentence answers spreading misinformation from a youtube video they watched.
Just safe the question and come back later.
Deltasims on
Turns out that when you see a post titled ” Should Germany be blamed for starting WW1″ on r/AskHistorians , they expect a thorough and nuanced answer from an actual historian with sources, not a teenage Kaiserboo LARPer writing a 3 sentences response that goes like:
>Versailles was too harsh.
>Russia is to blame for declaring partial mobilization.
>Germany did not have a belligerent officer corp that kept pushing for war, no. The circumstances forced them to execute the Schlieffen plan.
>Source: The Sleepwalkers: How Europe Went to War in 1914 (Christopher Clark)
MrBKainXTR on
For what it’s worth there is r/AskHistory which is much less strict (while still having some rules / basic standards )
kardoen on
It’s so much easier to produce single-sentence misinformation than an extensive and supported answer. And debunking misinformation takes more effort than producing it. Removing bad replies means that the ones you actually read are much more likely to be reliable.
If you don’t care for accuracy you don’t have to wait for comments on r/AskHistorians to be posted, you can just read something else like a fantasy book. They even have dragons, now that’s history!
shre3293 on
god forbid a sub prefers an answer with nuance and details unlike this one which has plethora of dogshit memes full of misinformation or propagating their small minded view point.
New_Hentaiman on
I understand the frustration, but I think this is the only way to keep this sub as good as it is. It also kept me from really doublechecking the posts I wrote, before posting and reviewing my sources. When I comment on a question it is only something I have written about already or that I have researched extensively and I often not only refer back to my notes, but also go back to the library and in my pdf folder before posting.
DeceptiveDweeb on
historians try not to destroy media they deem “incorrect” thinking that they aren’t doing the exact thing fascists of the past have done. (they also believed that what they censored was for the good of humanity as well. everyone believes they are the Good Guy)
DelusionalForMyAngel on
they only accept sourced high-effort comments, it’s based as fuck actually. you have the rest of Reddit if you want to see some dude talk out of his ass about something he knows nothing about, let one sub be well-moderated
SnooBooks1701 on
Well, if you’re not gonna post sources, of course it’ll get removed
ThatOneCloneTrooper on
I asked a question about Edward 1 and it got removed, I asked again making my question more clear and it got removed again. I don’t understand the rules of that sub.
Lopsided-Weather6469 on
It’s called Ask**Historians** for a reason
da_supreme_patriarch on
That’s actually a good thing tbf, there are other, less strict subs to discuss historical topics more freely. My only gripe is that sometimes there is a very interesting question there that will get triple digit uplvotes, but no answers, and there is no real convenient way to bump the question up again
D2Foley on
Half the questions are just “why didn’t X country do Y?” 99% of which are impossible for historians to answer.
Firecracker048 on
Their standards over there are VERY high and they dont allow anything other than source, fact-based information
14 Comments
I think the heavy moderation is a good thing. That way you get really high quality answers from people who actually know their shit. Not some one sentence answers spreading misinformation from a youtube video they watched.
Just safe the question and come back later.
Turns out that when you see a post titled ” Should Germany be blamed for starting WW1″ on r/AskHistorians , they expect a thorough and nuanced answer from an actual historian with sources, not a teenage Kaiserboo LARPer writing a 3 sentences response that goes like:
>Versailles was too harsh.
>Russia is to blame for declaring partial mobilization.
>Germany did not have a belligerent officer corp that kept pushing for war, no. The circumstances forced them to execute the Schlieffen plan.
>Source: The Sleepwalkers: How Europe Went to War in 1914 (Christopher Clark)
For what it’s worth there is r/AskHistory which is much less strict (while still having some rules / basic standards )
It’s so much easier to produce single-sentence misinformation than an extensive and supported answer. And debunking misinformation takes more effort than producing it. Removing bad replies means that the ones you actually read are much more likely to be reliable.
If you don’t care for accuracy you don’t have to wait for comments on r/AskHistorians to be posted, you can just read something else like a fantasy book. They even have dragons, now that’s history!
god forbid a sub prefers an answer with nuance and details unlike this one which has plethora of dogshit memes full of misinformation or propagating their small minded view point.
I understand the frustration, but I think this is the only way to keep this sub as good as it is. It also kept me from really doublechecking the posts I wrote, before posting and reviewing my sources. When I comment on a question it is only something I have written about already or that I have researched extensively and I often not only refer back to my notes, but also go back to the library and in my pdf folder before posting.
historians try not to destroy media they deem “incorrect” thinking that they aren’t doing the exact thing fascists of the past have done. (they also believed that what they censored was for the good of humanity as well. everyone believes they are the Good Guy)
they only accept sourced high-effort comments, it’s based as fuck actually. you have the rest of Reddit if you want to see some dude talk out of his ass about something he knows nothing about, let one sub be well-moderated
Well, if you’re not gonna post sources, of course it’ll get removed
I asked a question about Edward 1 and it got removed, I asked again making my question more clear and it got removed again. I don’t understand the rules of that sub.
It’s called Ask**Historians** for a reason
That’s actually a good thing tbf, there are other, less strict subs to discuss historical topics more freely. My only gripe is that sometimes there is a very interesting question there that will get triple digit uplvotes, but no answers, and there is no real convenient way to bump the question up again
Half the questions are just “why didn’t X country do Y?” 99% of which are impossible for historians to answer.
Their standards over there are VERY high and they dont allow anything other than source, fact-based information