You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–] [deleted] 1 points 6 points (+7|-1) ago 



[–] 6195983? 2 points 10 points (+12|-2) ago 

No overtly political content, where the emphasis is on the politics rather than any intrinsic artistic/aesthetic value. Please consider /v/politics, which allows images, for such content.

I think people should decide this by voting rather than a mod step in and decide if a picture is political or not. Is picture of the President or Putin political? It could be said so since Obama will be campaigning for Clinton as well and Putin is also affiliated with a political presence within Russia. If it's not breaking rule 3, I say leave it alone. There alots of pictures that can be considered artistic of political situations though.

Better to let the people decide.


[–] Cynabuns 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

I agree with this opinion - make this a GUIDELINE for vote-action with no mod interference.


[–] kevdude 3 points 8 points (+11|-3) ago 

This should not be a rule at all. If there is user consensus that people prefer content not be political this should still be a vote-enforced piece, not a mod delete piece.


[–] TheKobold 3 points 7 points (+10|-3) ago 

I think this rule has to go, its to easy to abuse as the term political content could be deemed to mean anything. This ind of rule is exactly how much of reddit's subs are censored.


[–] 6232994? 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

I think this rule is to fuzzy and to easy to abuse by moderator bias. Is an image of the barren streets and nailed windows in Detroit too political? Is a picture of a statue of Lenin, Rhodes or Kaiser Wilhelm too political? Is a picture from the JFK assassination too political?

I am only worried about low effort image macros catering to the circle jerk, and they are already covered by Rule 3.