AskHistorians

1209 readers

3 users here now

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

Ladies and Gentlemen I am now the mod. I plan to rule with an IRON FIST. jk. Anyone want to be a mod with me? Or is there any changes I can make to better this community? (lemmy.world)

submitted 2 weeks ago by Patnou@lemmy.world to c/askhistorians@lemmy.world

14 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Vegan_Joe@piefed.world 29 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

You joke, but ruling with an iron fist in an academic sub is preferable. Requiring a bit of academic integrity in responses to questions is what makes a history sub valid. For instance, requiring all responses to provide sources should be a bare minimum.

The old place required "answers that are in-depth, comprehensive, well-sourced (academic), and written by knowledgeable contributors, prohibiting bigotry, speculation, links as answers, and current event discussions", with a core principle to "provide high-quality historical information, not quick facts, focusing on expert-vetted responses that adhere to historical methodology and avoid modern political debates, even if framed around history."

Being extremely judicious in the act of moderating is one of the aspects that allows academic subs to flourish.

[–] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 8 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

I'm just concerned we don't have the same pool of expert historians here to reach the same standard. I do think we should be as rigorous as we can but I do wonder if using the other communities standards would mean just no answers to any questions.

Definitely requiring sources is a good idea though. And I'm not sure how to delineate this but making sure they're quality sources too, since there's some pretty bad historical analysis out there these days and Lemmy has a lot of partisans who will want to push their agenda over the truth.

[–] fishos@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks ago

Seconding this. I'd rather have a few really quality posts than a graveyard of spam and low effort bs. High standards are EXACTLY what made the reddit version great. It might have some rough growing pains, but it will be worth it in the long run.

Quality over quantity.

[–] PugJesus@piefed.social 4 points 2 weeks ago

You joke, but ruling with an iron fist in an academic sub is preferable. Requiring a bit of academic integrity in responses to questions is what makes a history sub valid. For instance, requiring all responses to provide sources should be a bare minimum.

Shit man, even AskHistorians on R*ddit doesn't require sources in the original answer. From the Old Place:

We do not require sources to be preemptively listed in an answer on /r/AskHistorians, but do expect that respondents be familiar with relevant and reliable literature on the topic, and that answers reflect current academic understanding or debates on the subject at hand.

Even though sources are not mandatory, if someone asks you to provide sources in good faith, please provide them willingly and happily. If you are not prepared to substantiate your claims when asked, please think twice before answering. Requests for sources which are not fulfilled within a reasonable span of time will generally result in the removal of the answer.