As I’m sure you’ve already memorized the community rules as if it was your moms birthday, I probably need not post it, but here is rule 6 anyway:
- No US Politics.
Please don’t post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online
I am writing this post in an effort to gather feedback on how the community feels about this rule. In short, keep it as it is, or revise it.
It is my personal belief that the main purpose it serves is to avoid the community from mainly revolving around whatever daft thing the orange lardsack last said or did. And while it serves that purpose well, I think it also inhibits some potentially interesting discussions.
For example, one possible revision could be to allow for questions regarding US politics, but with a requirement that the topic has to be regarding issues 25 years ago (that may or may not be relevant today).
Alternatively, would it be useful/entertaining to occasionally have a “Contemporary US politics question megathread” as a contained outlet?
Please let me hear your thunks. This post will stay stickied for “a while”.
UPDATE: There seems to be overwhelming majority in keeping r6 as is, at minimum. Thank you for your input, and stay classy.
Fair, but nuanced rules are difficult to enforce, and somewhat open to interpretation. This leads to people trying to skirt the rules and also good faith posts which break the rules which leads to conflict also.
I think it’s better to keep things as simple as possible, as long as the rule is good enough.
Totally agree. But let’s for example say someone asks a question about something related to economics. I think it would be unfair if Europeans could answer a lot of stuff about politics, while Americans are pretty limited.
Imo It already requires nuance at the moment, the only thing that would change is that all users would be treated the same