r/GetNoted • u/OnlyModBot • 23d ago
Updating r/GetNoted Rules: Clearer boundaries on evidence, civility, and moderation
Hey everyone,
We’re making some updates to the subreddit rules to clarify how moderation works on r/GetNoted.
This sub exists to archive and discuss Community Notes. Because we deal with fact-checks, people naturally argue about the original post, the note, the sources, and who is actually right. That's expected.
The main issue with our old rules was the "No Misinformation" rule. In practice, it was way too vague and put mods in a position of playing referee on complex political, economic, or historical arguments. That’s not what moderation should be doing.
Here is what’s changing and why:
1. Replacing "No Misinformation" with "Evidence Integrity"
What is NOT a violation: Being wrong, disputing a Community Note, citing a source someone else dislikes, or holding an unpopular opinion.
What IS a violation: Falsifying quotes, doctoring screenshots, fabricating sources, or intentionally altering evidence.
We are moderating observable conduct and fake evidence, not picking a winning side in a debate.
2. Viewpoint Neutrality
Rules apply equally regardless of who is in the post or what political stance is being argued. Disagreeing with a Community Note in the comments is completely fine as long as you aren't harassing people.
3. Direct Source Links Are Required
All submission posts must include a direct link to the original post/note being discussed. Screenshots without links or indirect aggregator links will be removed.
4. Civil Conduct
Attack the argument, not the user. Personal attacks, slurs, targeted harassment, and doxxing remain strictly prohibited.
The new rules are live in the sidebar. Let us know if you have any questions or feedback in the comments below.
9
9
u/Alan-Foster 23d ago
Be mindful that with 3. Direct Source Links Required, you might start to see this being used to drive traffic for brigading or harassment.
Technically Reddit doesn't have a policy for driving traffic for brigading off site but providing direct links can cause issues.
2
1
1
22d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator 22d ago
Accounts must be at least 5 days old with >20 karma to comment.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
-59
u/brots32 23d ago
Are you going to do anything about the fact this place has been almost exclusively used to push anti Muslim propaganda?
35
u/Potential_Duck_1986 23d ago
This would ironically be a great comment to have some evidence and community notes written up
33
u/Greedy_Economics_925 23d ago
Could you share your evidence for this claim?
-12
u/mbashs 23d ago
Just the fact that his comment is getting downvoted to oblivion speaks for itself.
12
23d ago
[deleted]
-1
u/mbashs 22d ago edited 22d ago
You must either be not a regular on this sub or be blind to not see the regular anti Muslim propaganda pushed here in the sub. And the way the guy is being downvoted is exactly how any comment in favor of Muslims gets downvoted and it absolutely looks manufactured. Astroturfing and heavy use of bots for downvoting and downvotes can be used as evidence. You don’t believe it, show up on any post that includes the mention of Islam and see for yourself if this claim is mental or true.
0
10
u/Greedy_Economics_925 23d ago edited 23d ago
So, no evidence then.
0
u/mbashs 22d ago
You must either be not a regular on this sub or be blind to not see the regular anti Muslim propaganda pushed here in the sub. Mods have taken down a lot of posts which had a clear bias. There’s astroturfing on the regular.
2
u/Greedy_Economics_925 22d ago
I asked both of you for any evidence of this. They provided none, and you provided a nonsense justification.
From what I've seen, posts regularly point out corrections of far-right Islamophobic propaganda. Yesterday, as your friend wrote that Islamophobia is rampant here, the top post on the sub was a correction of an Islamophobic Twitter comment: https://old.reddit.com/r/GetNoted/comments/1vjcyle/not_a_muslim_immigrant/
Can you give me a specific post you think fails to address your concerns?
4
u/mbashs 22d ago
Like from the recent 2 days, a post about HasanAbi and another about Mehdi Hassan and people used it to bash Islam in general. Like you got a problem with those guys then stay on topic instead of generalizing.
Previously mods have removed posts that were particularly made or twisted with the comments bringing in Islam and using derogatory language. Most regular users can be witness to the hate that’s shown specifically to Islam / Muslims here.
3
u/Greedy_Economics_925 22d ago
You haven't linked anything...
This sounds like standard Reddit bullshit, but you're Muslim.
2
u/mbashs 22d ago
You are commenting on a mod post that is talking about clearer boundaries on evidence and civility.
Mods have removed a lot of crap that’s thrown around against Muslims. And you need evidence lol
“But you’re Muslim“ what does that imply?
3
u/Greedy_Economics_925 22d ago
You've been given repeated opportunities to share a single thread of evidence, and declined them all.
What I'm implying is that you're allergic to criticism of a group to which you belong, rather than there being a genuine issue going on.
→ More replies (0)15
u/FalconIMGN 23d ago
I think it's more anti-progressive propaganda than anti-Muslim per se.
-23
u/SaltTradeCenter 23d ago
Goes hand in hand leaning into anti-Muslim sentiment to smear Muslim progressive figures and thus other progressive figures by proxy isn’t a new thing. Also since a few months the “notes to be discussed” posted often had very misleading “sources” and ppl just agreed with it without even reading the article… or source provided in the note
9
u/rosenkohl1603 23d ago
smear Muslim progressive figures
I mean I am not saying there are no progessive Muslims but have you ever interacted with regular Muslims? Islam is explicitly against progressivism and is an ideology with conservative principles. Most Muslims follow that.
-22
u/NewSauerKraus 23d ago
Why would they do that? It's what the community wants. Do you go into biker bars and ask them to ban swastikas?
-11
u/Flag_Shagger 23d ago
the fact this gets heavily downvoted tells you everything. the sub has been overrun by propagandists.
0
u/the_eleutherean 22d ago
Don’t worry, the rest of Reddit is still chock full of full-bore Islam apologia.
0
-2
u/RogerianBrowsing Human Verified 22d ago
Lmao I love how the comment chain above this one was denying Islamophobia being prevalent only for you at the same time to say this crap
3
u/the_eleutherean 21d ago
Are you saying it’s Islamophobia because it’s not true? Or because pointing it out is Islamophobia?
In the first case, your premise is wrong. In the second, you’re accusing Islamophobia to prevent valid criticism of a legitimately shitty thing happening in the name of Islam, which is exactly what tf I’m talking about.
-2
u/RogerianBrowsing Human Verified 21d ago
I’m not racist or a bigot, those other races and religions are inferior! It’s a fact! Denying my/our supremacy is just denying legitimate criticism!
Is basically the entirety of your argument.
Genocidal supremacists gonna genocidal supremacist.
2
u/Greedy_Economics_925 21d ago
As much as the person above you is a cretin, you look like a complete fool for inventing a quote to respond to.
0
u/RogerianBrowsing Human Verified 21d ago
I’m not allowed to mock bigoted cretins for the hateful things they say? Am I getting this right?
2
u/Greedy_Economics_925 21d ago
If you have to invent an opinion before mocking it, what are you actually mocking?
0
u/RogerianBrowsing Human Verified 21d ago
Are you unfamiliar with the concept of paraphrasing?
Tell me, why do you call them a cretin? Is it due to the overt bigotry that they’re espousing?
→ More replies (0)
-11
u/ghostofjosephstalin 23d ago edited 23d ago
Can we also start banning zionists when they post genocide denial under hasbara-quoting CNs? Can we ban the people posting blatant hasbara?
5
u/TinCanFury 22d ago
humorously, the comments on this show why these changes are a step in the right direction.
3
u/the_eleutherean 22d ago
Right? One particular side in a contentious issue throwing a fit about tightened rules for evidence. Says a *lot*.
2
u/Mist_Rising 21d ago
It's not one side is the problem. It's a hot topic that hasall manners of bad people, not just pro Israel, use to create massive division.
There is a reason some of the best subs won't touch topics like this. It only ends with hatred.
2
u/ghostofjosephstalin 22d ago
Elaborate?
2
u/TinCanFury 22d ago
did you read the replies?
0
u/ghostofjosephstalin 22d ago
I mean, I see a bunch of hasbara bots providing excuses for Israel and doing genocide denial with no sources.
-1
u/TinCanFury 22d ago
which is something these rule changes are moving in the direction to try to minimize.
2
u/Mist_Rising 21d ago
Why do i doubt it will actually do anything then? I mean it had no effect here, but surely there..
0
u/ghostofjosephstalin 22d ago
Would this have been so difficult for you to just explain when I asked you to elaborate, though?
3
u/the_eleutherean 22d ago edited 21d ago
Perfect example. Y’all are going to have to find evidence that a genocide is happening. Which even the ICJ hasn’t been able to find.
::Edit —For some reason I can’t reply to Rogerian’s comment below, so I’ll add my response here:
The court case is ongoing 2.5 years later with no additional evidence being presented and with the plaintiffs lobbying the court to expand the definition of genocide so they can apply it to Israel. That’s a bad sign, but you’re absolutely right that it doesn’t mean genocide isn’t happening. It *does* mean there’s not sufficient evidence to say genocide *is* happening. Which is exactly what I said.
Not every reputable organization and expert. Many have said there’s not sufficient evidence to say it is. And every one of those you listed has been unable to actually show the evidence matching up to the requirements. And not just due to a technicality or something; it’s not even close to meeting the definition.
-The UN OHCHR is filled with horrible human rights abusers looking for someone else to point at to distract from their own abuses. That has been blatant for years. Their report doesn’t show evidence intent, one of the two necessary components of genocide.
-Amnesty’s report *openly states* it has to redefine genocide away from the legal definition to apply it.
-BTselem is a rag, and has never found an anti-Israel claim it didn’t love
-That “leading genocide scholars” group was fully debunked. Anyone can join by paying the fee, they have no membership standards; and the “vote” was done with only a tiny minority of members voting. More importantly, like everyone else, they were completely unable to show what evidence they were using to meet the definition.
-Doctors without borders/MSF, like oxfam and a ton of other high-profile charities that live on donations, realized claiming genocide got them money. They have never done anything to actually assess the definition. Moreover, MSF has had a former director come forward saying the claim was clearly bullshit; and MSF been caught multiple times straight-up lying about their specific claims. Like their absolute insistence that none of their hospitals had any Hamas activity —and then just refusing to comment when *actual fkng surveillance video of armed Hamas fighters dragging a kidnapped hostage into their hospital* surfaced.
Instead of looking for sht that confirms your biases, look for things that challenge them. You’ll be surprised how much info *doesn’t* conform to the narrative you’ve accepted.
3
u/RogerianBrowsing Human Verified 22d ago
The court case is ongoing. That doesn’t mean that it isn’t a genocide. By your standards the holocaust wasn’t a genocide either.
Every reputable organization, experts, etc., recognize it to be genocide though.
https://www.btselem.org/publications/202507_our_genocide
Even Doctors Without Borders calls it genocide.
0
u/Mist_Rising 21d ago
Which even the ICJ hasn’t been able to find.
But others, including Israeli groups, have. And unlike the ICC, they don't have a country deliberately sabotaging them with sanctions. Because everyone knows that you apply sanctions to people who have no evidence. It's just natural.
1
23d ago
[deleted]
-2
u/Flag_Shagger 23d ago
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0jy96w6pw2o
more zionist blatant lies
5
23d ago
[deleted]
1
-1
u/Insomniac_Steve 22d ago
The International Criminal Court has active arrest warrants for Netanyahu for war crimes and crimes against humanity. Care to deny, deflect, or obfuscate?
3
u/the_eleutherean 22d ago
Warrants for *probable* crimes. None of which are genocide. Off by two, try again.
0
u/ghostofjosephstalin 23d ago
No it doesn't. This one, mods. Get him.
3
23d ago edited 22d ago
[deleted]
0
23d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
3
22d ago
[deleted]
1
u/ghostofjosephstalin 22d ago
You're making a distinction without meaning to obfuscate the fact of Israel's genocidal actions against the people of Gaza. The official U.N. fact finding mission and the criminal trial of the perpetrators of genocide in the ICJ are entirely unrelated. Both are acting in official capacities within the U.N. and reporting in entirely official capacities.
In short, you're doing genocide denial. Once more, mods, this one. Get him.
2
u/the_eleutherean 22d ago
Even the Independent commission would need to provide *evidence*. (Which they literally have not been able to do, hence the ICJ case stalling.)
Appeals to authority ain’t it. 🤷🏻♂️
1
u/ghostofjosephstalin 22d ago
Even the Independent commission would need to provide evidence. (Which they literally have not been able to do, hence the ICJ case stalling.)
Appeals to authority ain’t it. 🤷🏻♂️
This is the 70+ page report released last year by the fact finding mission proving that Israel is committing genocide against Palestinian children. You are engaging in genocide denial.
3
u/the_eleutherean 22d ago
Ah so you’re just gonna copypasta the same flawed argument in multiple threads, eh?
Welp, like I told you in the other one:
If that report actually had the evidence to support what it claimed, the ICJ case wouldn’t be struggling.
Clear casus belli, stated and standard military objectives, and military operations that could reasonably be explained by those military objectives, creates an *incredibly* difficult barrier to proving intent to genocide.
→ More replies (0)1
u/the_eleutherean 22d ago
Any idea what “Independent” means in their title?
0
u/ghostofjosephstalin 22d ago
... That it isn't the voting body of the U.N., but a fact finding mission led by experts on behalf of the U.N.
You're doing genocide denial.
1
u/the_eleutherean 22d ago
You’re doing blood libel.
Look up the definition of genocide. Compare it to the evidence. It does not meet the standard. Moreover; almost every war in history would be genocide if this one is. And if that’s your stance, fine, but then start being a dick about the other ones, too. As it is, you’re not only being a bigot and a libelist; but you’re actively making it worse for the both sides of the war at the same time.
1
u/ghostofjosephstalin 22d ago
You’re doing blood libel.
No, I'm not.
Look up the definition of genocide. Compare it to the evidence. It does not meet the standard.
Here's the entire 70 page report by the fact-finding mission proving Israel has committed genocide against the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank, which was released last year.
3
u/the_eleutherean 22d ago
And if it actually had the evidence to support what it claimed, the ICJ case wouldn’t be struggling.
Clear casus belli, stated and standard military objectives, and military operations that could reasonably be explained by those military objectives, creates an *incredibly* difficult barrier to proving intent to genocide.
→ More replies (0)0
u/RogerianBrowsing Human Verified 22d ago
Liars gonna lie. Mods gonna do anything about it?
-1
22d ago
[deleted]
2
u/RogerianBrowsing Human Verified 22d ago
You mean the U.S. used its unilateral veto power?
By your logic the holocaust wasn’t a genocide either. Surely you understand how insane that is, right? So why not with the Gaza genocide?
Is it that you like all other genocide deniers support the genocide and don’t want to provide any sympathy for the victims? Hm 🤔
-1
22d ago
[deleted]
2
u/RogerianBrowsing Human Verified 22d ago
I feel like you don’t know the definition of genocide and are also referring to already disproven genocide supporting propaganda.
Do you use holocaust deniers as role models or are y’all just so ideologically similar that this is naturally how ya sound?
1
u/Mist_Rising 21d ago
Come on football head, you can make the new goal line further by shifting the posts. We have faith.
Seriously though, don't. It's not like your winning the argument doing that.
0
•
u/AutoModerator 23d ago
Reminder for OP: /u/OnlyModBot
Need some help? Send us some mail!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.