Changes highlighted in italics:
- Instance rules apply.
- [New] Be reasonable, constructive, and conductive to discussion.
- [Updated] Stay on-topic, specially for more divisive subjects. Avoid unnecessarily mentioning topics and individuals prone to derail the discussion.
- [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.
- Avoid crack theories and pseudoscientific claims.
- 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!
Are comedic posts still going to be allowed? I looked through the community and saw a couple. I suppose they are covered by rule 5?
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
I didn’t see that one, but in the recent posts there is “bro wake up, seven new laryngeals have dropped” and the xkcd about “going to”.
Oh yeah, I forgot about linguistics_humor - even though I’m subscribed already. That does make sense.
deleted by creator
All seem like improvements to me.
Avoid crack theories and pseudoscientific claims.
Aww but I love talking about Altaic!
deleted by creator
If I said the variant of the Altaic hypothesis that includes Korean, can it be classed as a crack theory?
deleted by creator
I’m just a lurker, but does rule #3 come from that user that started a nuclear war because someone told them their link was behind a paywall? That thread was embarrassing, so I guess it makes sense.
Nuclear war?
deleted by creator
