worldnews

4831 readers

1 users here now

Rules:

Be civil. Disagreements happen, that does not give you the right to personally insult each other.
No racism or bigotry.
Posts from sources that aren't known to be incredibly biased for either side of the spectrum are preferred. If this is not an option, you may post from whatever source you have as long as it is relevant to this community.
Post titles should be the same as the article title.
No spam, self-promotion, or trolling.

Instance-wide rules always apply.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

On "World" vs. "Worldnews": (lemmy.world)

submitted 7 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

8 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Hey all! Friendly neighborhood mod here!

I've just been added to this group, "Worldnews", in addition to my existing group "World", along with @[email protected] (HEY SQUID!)

The reason being, the mods here had effectively retired. Hurts, the lead mod, stepped away and hadn't been active for MONTHS, and post and comment reports were PILING up, to a point where the Admins asked in our Discord chat going "Hey, what's going on with worldnews?"

Which left ME confused, because "world" has a friendly name of "World News" and is generally up to date on the report queue unless two users are engaging in:

https://youtu.be/17ocaZb-bGg

Which, (sigh), happens way more often than I'd like, but what are you going to do?

Before they left 5 months ago, Hurts had pinned a question asking, basically, "Do we NEED world AND worldnews?" which I think is a valid question.

There are some key differences, world doesn't accept video links or text pieces, but there's no rule against that in worldnews, so it's a little more free-form than world, although both require legitimate news sources.

So for now, consider the discussion OPEN! Keep them both? Close one or the other?

The volume difference is pretty dramatic:

world:

worldnews:

top 8 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 10 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I'd say nuke the unused one. Or nuke the posts place a sticky referring to the other and lock it for new content.

If it cannot be maintained by its userbase, no need to keep it around.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago

And there's not much userbase here to begin with. I'd be fine with this community getting nuked in favor of [email protected]

[–] [email protected] 9 points 7 months ago (1 children)

There are about a dozen worldnews communities. The beauty of the fediverse some would say, but in my view it is one of the weaknesses. So kill off one of the two, just leave a post referring to the other.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 7 months ago

Pretty much how I feel, but I didn't want to just DO that without engaging with the users who ARE here.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 7 months ago

Happy to see active moderation here now. And I can see each community (world and worldnews) having different enough mandates/focuses to coexist.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I always assumed the two communities were the result of some mod-drama/schism, if that's not the case, nuking one makes perfect sense to me. Unfortunately the lesser used and formerly mod-abandoned community has the better underlying name, but what can you do.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago

Yeah, I agree, it's confusing, and the creation of both groups happened before my time so I can't really speak to the motivation behind them.

I'll talk to the admins and see what can and can't be done, but shuttering the smaller one does seem to be for the best.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago

@[email protected], for some reason I didn't get pinged when you posted this. Sorry about that!

Welcome, everyone!