I'm in a fairly niche discipline that does have a subreddit. If someone posts a question in a subject I specialize in I'll post a fairly detailed answer with links to pertinent research papers. These invariably get 2-3 upvotes and gets buried behind speculation from undergrads and "hobbyists". It's worse than getting banned.


Nothing will undermine your faith in Reddit faster than reading about a topic which you are an expert in. Or even vaguely knowledgeable to be honest.


r/archaeology is currently a mess because of a prominent conspiracy theorist who got a Netflix series. Most posts are now deleted or locked I think if anyone goes to look. Lots of people coming in to argue that "Big Archaeology" is suppressing the truth because we are unwilling to admit we are wrong.


“Big Archeology” 😂


Commenter: "But think of the thousands of dollars in grants they might get!" Dr. Sarumon: "NO. Tens of thousands."


The fun battles I didn’t even realize were being waged…


You're an archaeologist? cool! I love dinosaurs!


Ha, I used to have a folder full of screen shots from dating app of women opening by asking me about dinosaurs. My goal is to find a toy one on a dig so I can answer "wanna see the latest dinosaur I've found?"


I am very disappointed that people's default question of an archaeologist these days is about dinosaurs. They should be asking about whips and hats!


Perhaps I can balance this out as I am a palaeontologist who gets asked about Indiana Jones


The default question is generally about finding gold, then dinosaurs, then "what is the coolest thing you've found," then maybe whips and hats. Its pretty far down the line for all ages.


No questions about the holy grail or the ark of the covenant? :(


No jokes like, "your mummy" jokes?


History. You are the keeper of world history and every day seems to uncover new and interesting things! I wanted badly to be an archeologist but there were no jobs at the time. Still- you are a blessing to the world.


I used to live in an area with a fair amount of petrified wood in the ground, so often I'd unearth pieces when doing yard work or just walking around the fields behind the house. If they were interesting (branches, sap, etc) I would bring them in to show my wife. One day I dug up a plastic dinosaur so came running to get her to see the dinosaur I'd dug up. She wasn't that amused.


> find a toy Plant one like it's an episode of Storage Wars.


Anthro based or Classical archaeology?


"you like math? Here's this arbitrary nine digit division problem -- why are you walking away?"


Omg! I saw that show listed on Netflix and was like "well this is sure to be inaccurate"


I saw the first episode yesterday. Joe Rogan? And many sentences implying that nobody takes this and that seriously because... no reason given? An unexplained rise in sea levels during an ice age because... Huh? No wonder no one takes him seriously if that's all he's willing to share - nothing of value. But the victim/hero complex is strong.


The problem is that a lot of people DO take him seriously. We have fostered a culture where all you need for people to believe everything you say is to have the biggest megaphone. And, those megaphones only get handed to the people who can say the craziest garbage with the most confidence. Think about it, Joe Rogan was a stand up comedian whose greatest claim to fame, before his podcast, was hosting a reality show where he talked people into doing dumb shit for money. How the he'll did he turn into the authority on ...basically everything? I wish I had gone into psychology so I could study what makes hoards of people follow people like him.


While that's IMO all true, I was mainly talking about the journalist trying to shake up the archeology world with odd claims and apparently unsubstantiated narratives. Joe Rogan appearing there immediately let the alarm sirens ring. He's not known for being a scientific expert on anything, rather for entertaining anyone who's controversial enough for his show. ​ My girlfriend studies psychology and it has honestly lifted the veil of many people in media and around myself/us. It's like X-ray vision, cutting through bullshit, bias and illogical thinking left and right. On the other hand, it's less fun being analyzed constantly, almost like being a dissected frog.


US culture nowadays celebrates stupidity. People are proud of their authoritative ignorance.


Oh, crap… I feel for you guys! If you spend your day fielding Graham Hancock and Zachariah Stitchen questions you’re gonna go insane. Throw in a little David Icke and you have a trifecta of bullshit!




Not him, for once its not aliens. But it is another "there is no way the local indigenous people could have done any of this" theory.


Either way, racism.


Mainstream theorists versus ancient alien theorists?


I worked with a famous? Archeologist and he wanted to get more donations for his foundation so he asked me to make a quora account to answer questions, this was years ago by the way, and it turns out just like the boxes of letters we received in the real world with conspiracy theories and elaborate insane theories the internet turned out the same way. Short version, it wasn’t aliens, it was people, we have proof and have for years and it wasn’t slaves.


> Short version, it wasn’t aliens, it was people, we have proof and have for years and it wasn’t slaves. Sounds like something that someone in the pocket of Big Archeology would say.


I wish Big Archeology paid more lol


As someone who specializes in neuropharmacology....it really can be painful here on reddit hah


Did you know that dopamine causes schizophrenia?


Hahahaha. Oh, and there's this chemical that is supposed to be absorbed by mechanisms in our brain but can have deadly consequences if it accumulates in excess. It's called serotonin. The best way to reduce serotonin is to do only things that you hate, sleep at inconsistent hours, eat poorly, reduce all social interaction and move your body as little as possible. ((I'm kidding, I'm on SSRIs ffs))


Yes I’m a CPA and so much in the tax related subs is so wrong


Hey if you see something you don't like then just....write it off


Did you know if you buy a g wagon you can write the whole thing off the first year?


If you drive it into a lampost, pretty sure that's a write off ;-)


I just got a not so bright idea!


>Nothing will undermine your faith in Reddit faster than reading about a topic which you are an expert in There is at least one exception: /r/askhistorians I'm a flair there (since I'm a historian, natch) but honestly I am often amazed at the quality of the posts and responses. I've learned more from than sub than probably any other, and often grab ideas for my own classes there when someone posts a fact (or more often a really detailed, well-sourced, lengthy response) about some topic I already knew a fair bit about.


I had to unfollow Ask Historians. Almost every top answer in my field was stupendously wrong.


Yeah, the folks answering the questions there in my history niche are about 20 years behind the curve on the research. Often times, it seems they’ve read either a textbook or the Wikipedia page.


>Yeah, the folks answering the questions there in my history niche are about 20 years behind the curve on the research. It depends a lot on the topic and the specific person responding. Still, far better than any of these other fora on reddit IMO. It's not like I'd go there expecting current research, but it is nice to find interesting questions being answered with actual sources/citations to legitimate scholarship.


The goal of the subreddit isn't to restrict access to historical study to professional historians. The goal is to make it accessible and allow the public to engage with historical discourse. Some answers aren't going to be on top of the field, and that's OK. So long as they aren't "wrong" and meet the standards laid out in the rules, they can pass. And if there is something seriously wrong with an answer, you can report it or engage in discussion about it in the comments.


Absolutely agree.


Agree. I’m not in “History” but I’m in a historically related field, and answer questions when they come up and I have time (too seldom, actually). That sub is so well moderated that you really only get high quality responses from published authors or very eager and informed hobbyists. And there are so many that you basically have redundancy and overlap in answers to so many questions. It’s a dream.


The writing sub is hot trash. I need to remind myself not to comment regularly lol


>Nothing will undermine your faith in Reddit faster than reading about a topic which you are an expert in. It's the 21st century version of the old Michael Crichton quote on what he called the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect: “Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray [Gell-Mann]'s case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward —reversing cause and effect. I call these the "wet streets cause rain" stories. Paper's full of them. In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know.”


Environmental engineering and microbial ecology here. It's tough realizing just how poorly we communicate to the general public.


Meh, I'm not a PhD, but was a master's student who read papers and I've been on reddit a while. I don't think there is an amount of improving your communication that will beat out short pithy quotes that resonate with people (regardless of truth). I really think it's a problem of the platform and the upvote system. I think there'd have to be a different platform altogether that's heavily regulated in who can answer questions.


It's a form of Gell-Mann Amnesia.


That's exactly it: https://www.epsilontheory.com/gell-mann-amnesia/


This is how I feel about a lot of general-interest podcasts.


This is why my partner, an aerospace engineer with two masters degrees, has had to ban himself from commenting in r/space and YouTube comments sections.


>YouTube comments sections. He or she was just asking for trouble with this one to be honest.


I hadn't even thought about reading the sub in my subject area. Most of the people I like to read used to be on twitter and are now on Mastodon.


Still trying to decide if I’m going to make that leap.


I asked a clarifying question in a math sub in order to help out the OP and was told that, if I needed to ask, it was "above my pay grade." I just unsubbed as it was clearly not the sub for me.


I read a great comment once describing the math sub, saying essentially that most of the responses are by underclassmen who are misunderstanding something. These posts are then mocked by upperclassmen who also don’t understand but for slightly subtler reasons.


The blind leading the blind.




My experience was that they’re very condescending over there. Granted… I only have an MA (not seeking a PhD… Many questions there *are* above my pay grade!) But they don’t do anything to make math more appealing to people that stumble in thinking they might learn something.


An MA alone makes you far more qualified than the average poster or commenter in /r/math. The condescension is less intimidating when you realize it's probably a high schooler or undergrad behind the screen.


I tell folks that I learned as much math in my MA as anyone else who didn't get a PhD in the same area. So you know as much Topology as I do (maybe more because it's been awhile since I took it) because it's not my research area. I know more about my particular area than you do, but most questions I encounter outside my research about math aren't related to my area - if they are then I can pull rank :) You are a master of mathematics, my friend.


I've asked a few (somewhat) high-level questions in /r/math and /r/statistics as I work through a very quantitative PhD, and one thing I've noticed that you'll frequently get a lot of comments that basically just regurgitate the first paragraph of the Wikipedia article and don't actually engage with the substance of the question. Like, I *know* that the Kullback-Leibler divergence is non-negative. I even know *why* it's non-negative. You're not helping by reiterating the coding interpretation - we've all seen that a million times before... /rant


Not a particularly niche discipline but r/law & basically every law related sub I've seen have this problem (particularly on anything political/politics adjacent, which is basically the whole sub as of now). Hyper-partisan commentary masquerading as intellectualism to the top, any actual discussion of law to the middle (if it matches the narrative formed by the former) or straight to the bottom (if it contradicts the set narrative). Part of me doesn't necessarily blame the worst offenders since I think it fundamentally grows from a desire for the world to be better than it is where "thing I want to happen politically" is also "settled and undisputed law" but it does get a bit aggravating to see it in and out any time you look at the law subs.


Yeah, being a political scientist on social media is an exercise is becoming progressively more cynical.


ice just quit all social media but reddit at this point. The urge to engage in pointless discussions is too strong Edit: Wanted to add that this is not a simply a partisan issue. Sadly, it's people all over the political spectrum who somehow feel empowered in their opinion by the means of social media. I just had a very long discussion with a left wing person who wanted to sell me China as better than the US. Hell no.


Oh yeah, it’s totally across the political spectrum. Drives me nuts because I have trouble letting the ignorant/awful thing just sit there with no response.


This is why r/lawyers is private and limited only to people who provide proof of being barred. It keeps out all the nonsense of r/law and other legal subreddits that are complete garbage.


That might sound controversial, but I tend to think that getting banned is often the best thing that can happen to you on the Internet, as that reminds one about of the futility of Internet discussions and allows to save time and energy for something more useful and gratifying.


This is real life for me: I will try to tell people about my community and culture, and in the European dominated part of the world I live in, I will frequently get overruled and schooled about my native language, my culture, and my place in the hierarchy of world peoples. I'm like how can you be so confident (and arrogant) about the things that are so far outside your area of expertise?


Same. I've started just being an asshole and waving titles around. I'm in a lot of animal ID subreddits and whenever I see a bunch of nonsense in the comments and upvotes for incorrect IDs, I start my comments with "hello! Your friendly Reddit mammalogist here!" then give my answer. Is it pretentious? Yeah probably. But I can't just let people believe every little brown rodent they see is a vole! Rodents are so diverse!!


Not banned, but I’ve been temporarily banned from r/askphilosophy in the past and now I don’t post there too much. In short, I have a lot of problems with their flair system.


Did you give them the Office Space Jennifer Aniston speech?


… basically


Bunch of Lumberghs.


Amazing comment stream. LOL


I feel this way about r/AskEconomics. I think they mostly do a good job though, I just hate the gatekeeping. I understand why they do it, but it does ruin the atmosphere considerably -- especially since it takes like 10hrs minimum for answers to be reviewed in most cases. I still leave answers, but very infrequently because of this. Nothing is encouraging like spending an hour or more of my free time writing a detailed response and explanation of a niche topic only for it to never get approved and the approved answer to be "We've talked about inflation before, google it."


I’ve had some issues with r/chemistry but r/chempros is fine and I mod r/biochemistry so have some control there.




I avoid it like the plague. It is interesting to see the thought process, but also blood pressure raising to see wrong answers upvoted and right answers downvoted.


I have so much respect for mods generally. Not so sure about some of the other subs mentioned in this thread (that I never want to visit), but where I hang out, you see them doing their jobs mostly inconspicuously.


I pretty much just post in this subreddit and you all haven’t had the good sense to ban me quite yet


I got banned from AskScience for answering a question about a field I do not specialize in. The mods told me if I ever commented again I'd be banned from Reddit (the whole thing). ... Power trip? Who knows.


I have a PhD in molecular biology. Twice I’ve asked questions in there that were related to my field and both times my questions were rejected for being easily answered by Google. They were in fact not easily answered by Google.


I read that that last sentence in Morgan Freeman's voice


Askscience *sucks*. I've caught flak there years ago for answering stuff in my field but not in the way the mods agreed with.


Nowhere near as bad as r/science though. Shudders.


Oh absolutely. Jesus, that place is just /politics masquerading as science.


They’ve got a thousand mods but they still get slammed with racist and anti-science idiots all day. Hard to keep track of a thousand mods though so stupid stuff happens. Also the rules are insanely strict and have lost track of the original goals of the sub.


There's something funky about r/economics. 2.9 million members but relatively few posts and comments.


Maybe it was a default subreddit at some point?


I believe it was. Its mostly political news that gets throws in now a days. If you're lucky you'll find some interesting convos on something like a Fed press release or the like.


My guess is that people join because they think they want updates about the economy and think thats whay theyll get from r/economics but don't have anything to add personally.


Rationally maximizing the utility of the sub?


Free riding attempts


If you want some better econ subs I can recommend a few: r/AcademicEconomics -- Its pretty much what it says on the tin. r/BadEconomics -- The exact opposite of what it says on the tin, but it mostly makes fun of the rest of reddit. r/AskEconomics -- Typical Q&A subreddit, but with some pretty heavy moderation. I mostly think it does a good job, but it is very slow. The discussions are always very interesting though. r/EconMonitor -- mostly macro press releases / data releases, sometimes links to commentary from actual economists. Not much discussion usually though. r/DataIsBeautiful -- Not econ specifically, but what are economists if not data scientists. Its usually pretty tame, and the focus is mostly cool data and visualization. I've had a lot of fun there. r/fifthworldproblems -- Completely unrelated, but it is my personal favorite.


lol I’m banned from r/college because I critiqued a student who emailed cc’ed the department chair after the professor didn’t give him a make up exam.


I got banned because I made a really indirect reference to textbook piracy in a response to someone who couldn't afford a textbook. They are *weirdly* uptight about piracy given how laissez-faire they are about academic integrity, institutional policy, basic human empathy, etc.


> They are > >weirdly > > uptight about piracy given how laissez-faire they are about academic integrity, institutional policy, basic human empathy, etc. Sounds like, "Big Textbook" there :)


r/college is a complete joke of a subreddit. Sometimes it pops up on my feed and I take a few minutes over lunch break to write some answers to help clueless undergrads not look like complete idiots only to get downvoted to oblivion and reminded of why I don't usually interact with people there.


Until I read this post it never crossed my mind to even look up the reddit in my (sub)field.


With as narrowly focused as some of my inclinations get, I'd be shocked if a sub existed for any


This is interesting reading about problematic subreddits. I've never had a problem in any math or math education subreddit.


That's probably because they seem pretty apolitical. /r/economics attracts a lot of political attention.


As the saying goes "its a rare person who has a strong opinion about the ins and outs of obscure topology, but everyone and their mother has an opinion they're dying to tell you about the economy."


I got banned from r/math for not thinking that a diatribe about how the police are descended from slavers and intrinsically anti-POC was appropriate for the sub. EDIT: To be clear, this wasn't a comment, this was a top-level post someone made, explicitly approved by the mods in a comment under the post.


If I answer I question in r/nutrition I usually get downvoted and told I don’t know what I’m talking about because it doesn’t align with current keto cult mentality.


ooh nutrition is so interesting to me, got any common misconceptions you have fun debunking/general tips besides the basics of drink water eat veggies and exercise?


My nutrition students are always shocked I don’t think no/low carb is the only way to eat. Ugh 😑 I spend the first unit of the class dismantling the crap social media has “taught” them to be true. I’m sure I’d be banned from r/nutrition lol


Wanna swing over to the T2 diabetes sub? It's keto, dont use insulin ever and Trulicity (and they rest of those types of drugs) give you instant weight loss. Oh and vegan plant based diet is the way to go too, even when your pancreas is shot. The latest on fire topic is continous glucose monitors. My endo only writes scripts for people on an insulin pump/intricate insulin regimes. They are great for warning you of overnight lows. Well, everyone and their dog wants one now. They are spendy. My endo thinks CGM is over treatment for almost all his T2 patients. Cheaper to check sugars 2 hrs and 5 hrs after eating. He'll use a CGM on a new patient for two weeks to see over all trends. CGM are great for seeing trends. Are good for detecting overnight low. Anything else, you still need a meter reading. I'd never shoot insulin based on a CGM reading alone. I was almost banned for that comment. My figuring is you test when you are doing something with the data. I don't worry about overnight lows and not on a pump. People just like expensive medical tech because they feel cared for. The peeps that have a CGM (all are reading. never do anything with the readings.


Hi, type 1 diabetic here. Nearly 100% of us make treatment decisions, including insulin calculations, on CGM alone. It’s FDA approved for that exact purpose.


If you get an an odd reading, say a 450 reading on your CGM, are you adjusting your insulin pump without a finger stick, checking your needle placement, etc? Or are you YOLOing and dosing a bolus? Most T2 on that particular sub want the CGM because they never want to do finger sticks. If you are a T1 and been wrestling with diabetes since age 5, you are ninja status. You know one fawk up is at best an ER visit. The T2 sub recently had a reader with a new CGM, new medications, starting insulin and got an ER visit. False high blood sugar reading on the CGM, and over corrected with lispro. Came in with a 40 blood stick reading. Didn't bother to do any checking with the CGM or finger stick. Because what's the pointbof a CGM if I still have to do finger sticks? My ER doctor friend says T2 diabetics should have to be tested and license to own a CGM. They never check the sensor, over correct and it's his problem now.


Well, if my CGM jumped from, say, 150 to 450, yeah, I’d know it’s a CGM error. It’s also pretty easy for me to realize when a “low” is just a compression error. Usually happens after about day 16-17, and then I either calibrate frequently or just switch the CGM. But for the most part, yes, I make all my treatment decisions based on the Dexcom and the trend of my line. The other key point is that I can’t tell you the last time I’ve been at 450 (or even 350 for that matter). Being able to follow my trend line and cut off highs before they happen has been a literal lifesaver. Pre-CGM A1c = 8.0, current = 5.7


What about intermittent fasting? I have a family member who swears by it and only eats within a 4-6 hour window. All I see is the annoyance of being hungry all day just to look good. I know there’s some science behind it, but as a scientist I really hate hearing them crap on about inducing ketosis and other things that I know they really know virtually nothing about.


Banned from r/Freud. I am a psychologist 🤷


Although I haven't visited it in many years, I remember the psychology subreddit being a total dumpster fire.


Any discussion about psychology in general that isn't academic tends to be a total dumpster fire, unfortunately. I don't even want to be elitist about it, but the general population understands psychology even less than basic biology, in my experience. (Though the latter isn't trailing that far behind.) Personally, I chalk it up to how relatively new modern psychology is as a field, compared to something like modern medicine and physics.


BuT tHiS sTuDy oNLy HaS 100 pArTiCipAnTs!!1! aNd tHeY'Re aLL fRoM cALiFoRniA!!!1 Never mind the fact that each participant completes 300 trials of a cognitive task. Also, exactly **how** do you think people from California are different from people elsewhere in terms of how quickly they recognize upside-down T's? My second least favorite top comment on psychology posts is something along the lines of "You can't just ask people how happy they are. How can we REEEALLY trust what they say?" Well, maybe if you read literally **any** paper the validates a new measure, you might know.


> Also, exactly **how** do you think people from California are different from people elsewhere in terms of how quickly they recognize upside-down T's? To be fair, there *are* a lot of shoddy study designs out there. If we eliminated just those studies whose participants were 18-22 year-old university student WEIRDs, entire disciplines would instantly vanish. And as to your specific rhetorical question about recognizing upside-down T's, the obvious answer is that most Californians have been reading and writing upside-up T's (Roman alphabet) since they were preschoolers, and will likely recognize upside-down versions of this letter more quickly than Tibetans, Georgians, Japanese or the illiterate.


> I chalk it up to how relatively new modern psychology is as a field, compared to something like modern medicine and physics. Also, everybody has personal experiences that they think are relevant. This doesn't happen with, say, physics. ("Well, I had a cousin who dropped a penny where the velocity seemed odd, so here's my own take on Newton's laws....')


> Personally, I chalk it up to how relatively new modern psychology is as a field, compared to something like modern medicine and physics. I suspect it's more that three quarters of the population has at least one mental illness, has read all the wiki pages on it, and now considers themselves experts in the field.


That's surprising to me. I thought it would be full of totally well-adjusted people.


Thanks for saying that, it does give me some comfort 🙏


psychology forums (I’m not a clinician but I’m in an adjacent field) are completely dominated by a combination of teenagers begging to be told they have MPD and anti-psychiatric critics refusing to diagnose them


Truly, the duality of man


But you’re not banned from r/Freudsmother, right?


BWAH HAHAHAH you got me 🤣


Oh god k never even considered going to such a place. I think I’d better not. - your neighborhood evidence-based practices proponent


But how much coke do you do?


It's the only cure for my crippling opium addiction.


I would never post in my discipline's sub. Last thing I need.


Not currently but I’ve been simultaneously banned from the Catholicism and socialism subreddits before, which feels significant.


Not a fan of Dorothy Day, I take it?


On the contrary I’m a member of the Catholic Worker’s House lmao


No but almost every question I ask on r/askhistorians gets taken down. I'll try to repost on r/history and it again gets taken down. I tried to get ideas on historical misconceptions that I could address in my lectures or as topics to assign for their projects. Nope. Shut down.


I mean that's not really what AskHistorians specializes in. You might try /r/badhistory .


Probably. It was not just that question though. But I'll give that a shot.


My posts have been deleted over at askhistorians. They want footnotes for an internet post. My posts have been accurate (no conspiracy or political bias on my part). But sorry, this is an internet post not an academic journal.


Yep. That sub is waaaay too strict. I can’t put my Reddit post on my CV so I don’t even waste my time. I’ve had similar experiences on r/academicbiblical from time to time.


>That sub is waaaay too strict. And as a result it's the best tangentially academic sub on Reddit.


Sometimes. A lot of times you click on a topic only to see that 25 posts have been removed and there are no responses. There are ways to check credentials and then allow those folks to post with a bit more leeway.


Having high standards is what makes it a good sub


Allowing people with mod-verified academic credentials to answer questions with a little less strictness would still maintain high standards.


I disagree. I’m in Ancient Judaism, so, apparently a relatively close colleague of yours (see you in Denver?), and I think the quality demanded for the answers at Ask History is not replicable if it were to be replaced by credentials. For one, answers should be judged on their merits (including their sources), regardless of who is writing them. You know that there is a share of people in biblical studies who have all the credentials in the world, but are basically covertly engaging in apologetics. Second, in the three or four answers I’ve given in AskHistorians, I’ve actually not provided modern citations (I have given ancient ones), and both the mods and the community have accepted the answers every time. So, it’s not like they’re just blindly gatekeeping. They’re judging whether an answer is thorough and falsifiable. If that leads to 25 removed answers before one is accepted, so be it.


Good to know! And unfortunately I’ll be in Boston for ASOR instead. I miss them being in the same place!


Ah yes. That has become a conundrum these days.


In practice, they do this, if you are a "known quantity," basically play within the rules, and show a good-faith effort, they will not delete your replies, even if they are not heavily documented. The "fifteen footnotes for every answer" thing is something that people who aren't professors do (a lot of the respondents are grad students, people without PhDs, or hobbyists, and they are relatively closely policed). Known professors can get away with a short note at the bottom that reads, "the best source on this topic is X." If you are suggesting that the "removed" posts are of this quality — you can use a tool like ceddit to read them. 99% of the time they are "why doesn't this have answers?" or "why have all the posts been removed?" or one-liners, links to Wikipedia, or jokes. They are not missing gold. Occasionally they involve amateur responses that are based on popular understandings (e.g., an amateur who has Googled the question being asked, and pieced together an answer from Wikipedia), which, while not objectively _awful_ (in that they may reflect _an_ answer to the question), are not what the sub is meant to be about, and only would look sufficient if you really didn't have an expert-level understanding (because those answers are often missing quite a lot that is non-obvious, because there is a lot of error out there in the world). People who desire a lot less moderation are directed to /r/history, which does not have strict rules about answers, and so you get more of them. But they are frequently of much lesser quality. This of course does not guarantee that the "allowed" answers are all of equally accurate or good quality (one cannot say that of academic journal articles, either), but that's the explicit setup of the forum. Personally, it is one of the only communities of this sort that I think actually "works" with regards to cultivating expert participation of this sort. But figuring out what level of "work" is required from the expert (you can't just dash off an answer most of the time, but you also don't need to write a monograph) takes some experience with it.


Because the 25 posts that have been removed are uninformed answers . There are good well informed answer that don’t have footnotes, for the record. And it is the possibly the only academic sub on reddit that isn’t full of the most awful misinformation .


r/cinematography is 95% people in their early 20s who spent $500-1000 on a camera and think they’re [insert popular filmmaker.] I occasionally learn something useful on there (it feels like it’s gotten watered down a lot in the last 5-7 years) but rarely bother to answer questions because most commenters are overly eager to show how much they know (more than the last person.)


Reddit skews young. The largest demographic is 18 to 29. The more general the sub, the younger the base.


Yes! I’m an Ed Tech professor in an education program. Been banned from r/teachers for sharing free online teaching resources during the pandemic made by professors in the #1 research based conference/organization in my field (AECT) as they said it was spam and I trying to sell stuff. I tried to explain it was free high quality resources made by professors in their free time pro bono- but the idiot mods wouldn’t have it and insisted it must be a trick to buy something. I was just trying to share resources with teachers in need sheesh.


That sub is a bucket of crabs 🦀 🪣 I've never went to a K-12 teacher board/forum that isn't a tire fire.


What was it I wonder? They are oddly weird about tech they like don’t tell them you don’t like Kahoot


I've been warned in r/publichealth because they don't like to admit that the school you get your degree from does, in fact impact the connections you're able to make nd your ability to get well-paying positions particularly if you're going into academia.


That seems ridiculous to dispute on their part. Especially since the field of public health focuses a lot on complex social determinants resulting in different outcomes - including education. Just out of curiosity as someone also in this field, why do you think the mods pushed back against you saying that? In order to promote more people to join the field in any capacity? I’m just not sure what the motive would be. It seems like a no brained that the school you attend affects your career.


Well. I think their goal is to not push people seeking advice into attending a high ranked school no matter the cost. If you suggest to those people that there are benefits to going to highly ranked schools even though there is a high cost, commenters and mods argue that the high cost outweighs the benefit of any connections you could make at those schools. You're exactly right. It is really silly to dispute that, given that it openly ignores social determinants that influence opportunities for upward mobility.


I got a permaban from a city sub for not reason. There are lots of mods out there that just ban and don’t even bother citing the rule violation.


Most econ PhDs I know who hang out on reddit are banned from r/economics. So... one of us, one of us....


Not banned but had my flair stripped by the mods in r/AskSocialScience while answering a posted question, despite being the only person in the thread citing sources.


I was banned from several cycling subreddits for pointing out the obvious dumb things that cyclists do (I’m a cyclist btw).


I was also just banned from r/bikewrench for giving a legit answer to a question. Lol.


No banned but I gave up on anything cs related because it's literally just full of idiots.


Not banned, just not going to participate. I have enough difficulty telling students in-person that the way to get a job in this field isn't to grind Leetcode until you get a job interview that asks you one you have memorized. At least in person they can't downvote me to the bottom for saying that.


I'm having to have a talk with my class right now about the nonsense they learned on social media. Companies care if you can write good code, read documentation and turn it into code, and learn a new language or work flow if asked to do so. They don't give a rat's ass if you can answer some leet code problems.


Lol, that's how my son got his coop position. I'd never even heard of Leetcode before that.


I don't even know what I *specialize* in any more—I've been a generalist for quite some time. None of the courses I taught since 2003 were things that I had studied in undergrad or grad school, and only about half the subjects I taught before then were. I wouldn't know which subreddit to consider the one I specialize in. I read only about 4 subreddits on a regular basis (this one, my campus's, my town's, and r/nottheonion), and I peek in on 2 or 3 others once a month or so. I have never been banned from any of them (though I occasionally make a post or comment that gets heavily downvoted).


I’m banned from police subreddit.


No, but I was banned from an antiracism Facebook group 5+ years ago for pointing out the racist origin of terms that were being casually thrown around. The mods turned out to be clueless white 'allies' who cared more about the appearance of doing good then actually doing good. That said, lemme see how much they're gonna let me fuck around in r/math and r/mathematics. Once I did get shouted down for calculating a probability for a fictional situation. What they wanted was an accurate conditional probability statistic for a non real-life situation they made up 2 minutes earlier (think, what's the probability you take a shot of bourbon, slide across the floor, do a jig, and then open the bathroom door with just your pinkie). I mean, my undergrad was in actuarial science but I dunno, internet strangers know better, right?




Absolutely. r/worldnews is a joke.


Gotta go to r/anime_titties for actual global news


I fucking love that this exists


That's funny - I find /r/politics to be pretty left wing, and /r/economics to be surprisingly center-right for reddit. The real neoliberal safe haven is /r/neoliberal.




Banned, no. But did I give up on posting there because the mods and replies to questions were ridiculous? Yes.


I'm not banned from r/math but I avoid it anyway. Its mostly a dumpster fire with a surprising number of petty squabbles. Lots of first year students posting interesting facts they learned and 2nd year students showing how much they know by chiming in "well actually...." followed by 3rd year students.....and so on.


Nope. But most of r/nursing are floor nurses. I haven't worked in the hospital in some time, so there is very little I can comment on with first hand (recent) experience.


I was banned from r/literature before, but to be fair, that was during the dark days of the sub when almost everyone who posted got banned for some reason. I was even invited to a short-lived sub filled with the victims of r/literature's mods. But the sub has since been handed over to new mods who are a lot more inclusive.


I am not banned by r/Geography but I gave up and left that sub when it became 90% people sharing the results of some “memorize all the countries” game. It’s usually pretty superficial content.


Yeah, that sounds about the same as why I stopped looking at r/geology. It's basically endless "this is a weird rock" or "what is this rock?" posts.


Yes sounds about right. Fun if you are an interested 13 year old. But pretty dull if you are a PhD in the field.


Not banned, but I unsubbed from "psychology students" after my first comment about trauma (my specialty.) I was immediately bombarded with people telling me the psychological impact of trauma is bullshit and asking for my "sources". Ugh. I get too much of that at work lol


I study Chinese history and am banned from r/Sino, but that sub is 99% propaganda bought and paid for by the CCP, so I wear my ban with honor and pride.


No, but I got banned from fourth wave feminism .


I think those places got taken over by pop Marxists like two xx. They don’t even bother relating their posts back to women’s issue any more.


Well, they really hate sex workers and trans people among other things


No, but I've been told that I'm flat wrong and that if I continue to spread misinformation that I would be banned. My subspecialty is in regulatory public health, and I usually comment something along the lines of, "this probably isn't a good idea, but based on the wording of (insert code) you wouldn't be able to enforce anything". It devolves into them saying, "but as public health people we have to do something". Just because you want to do something doesn't mean you legally can. Apparently this is a hot opinion in public health and some specialty subs that mods don't agree with 🤷 Edit: punctuation


Nah. r/classics is pretty chill but mostly it’s kids asking well meaning questions about literature. I don’t even look at some of the other classics derived subs because there’s a very not 0 chance they’re populated by alt-right nuts. Stoicism is weirdly popular among legit Neo-Nazis and confederate cosplayers.


There is a very weird thing in r/Greek where a significant number of posters seems to feel Greek teachers are elitist gatekeepers, and that suggesting someone enroll in a Greek class to learn Greek instead of buying the Italian version of Athenaze or watching some youtuber is heretical.


I do not frequent a single design sub. Because we're fucking insufferable. Saying so would probably get me banned. So I'm being proactive.


Many of the subs in the social sciences have really questionable people presiding: be humble and as far to the left as possible if you want to avoid trouble. I have had several unpleasant encounters after expressing views that did not appear to be straight from the cookie-cutter, a fairly mandatory requirement in so many corners of the academy today. This is particularly true when certain personalities are moderating, with no retribution possible, should they decide to mistreat you.


I am left. It appears the r/economics has a Trumper moderator. At least that's what I've been told by other economists who have been banned. I don't care enough to really look into it.


I have very specialized on-topic, contemporary information in the field I teach in. When I post in domain's main sub, the mod's routinely delete my post with a generic notice. Meanwhile all sorts of other off topic and opinionated ramble posts remain. At first I was frustrated, now I don't bother responding to anything. It's like a high school clique with mod power. As for the other subs I'm banned in, it's because I held an opinion differing from the norm. No viewpoint diversity on reddit is my takeway regarding that.


Not banned, but found out my student was a mod of a large sub in my field, and knows my account, so kinda the same thing for me.


I got banned from r/hysterectomy for no reason and never received an explanation (on another handle). I only posted personal experience + peer-reviewed research. I did hear the moderator there will ban anyone who posts of negative experiences, which is ridiculous; major surgery is traumatic and many women will live with lifelong side effects (like ovarian failure, needing HRT). I was sad to lose the community that helped me through, but I do think the mod there has serious issues and board is worse off for it.