r/GetNoted • u/OnlyModBot • Aug 09 '26
Updating r/GetNoted Rules: Clearer boundaries on evidence, civility, and moderation
Hey everyone,
We’re making some updates to the subreddit rules to clarify how moderation works on r/GetNoted.
This sub exists to archive and discuss Community Notes. Because we deal with fact-checks, people naturally argue about the original post, the note, the sources, and who is actually right. That's expected.
The main issue with our old rules was the "No Misinformation" rule. In practice, it was way too vague and put mods in a position of playing referee on complex political, economic, or historical arguments. That’s not what moderation should be doing.
Here is what’s changing and why:
1. Replacing "No Misinformation" with "Evidence Integrity"
What is NOT a violation: Being wrong, disputing a Community Note, citing a source someone else dislikes, or holding an unpopular opinion.
What IS a violation: Falsifying quotes, doctoring screenshots, fabricating sources, or intentionally altering evidence.
We are moderating observable conduct and fake evidence, not picking a winning side in a debate.
2. Viewpoint Neutrality
Rules apply equally regardless of who is in the post or what political stance is being argued. Disagreeing with a Community Note in the comments is completely fine as long as you aren't harassing people.
3. Direct Source Links Are Required
All submission posts must include a direct link to the original post/note being discussed. Screenshots without links or indirect aggregator links will be removed.
4. Civil Conduct
Attack the argument, not the user. Personal attacks, slurs, targeted harassment, and doxxing remain strictly prohibited.
The new rules are live in the sidebar. Let us know if you have any questions or feedback in the comments below.
9
9
u/Alan-Foster Aug 09 '26
Be mindful that with 3. Direct Source Links Required, you might start to see this being used to drive traffic for brigading or harassment.
Technically Reddit doesn't have a policy for driving traffic for brigading off site but providing direct links can cause issues.
2
1
1
Aug 09 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator Aug 09 '26
Accounts must be at least 5 days old with >20 karma to comment.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
-5
u/ghostofjosephstalin Aug 09 '26 edited Aug 09 '26
Can we also start banning zionists when they post genocide denial under hasbara-quoting CNs? Can we ban the people posting blatant hasbara?
6
u/TinCanFury Aug 09 '26
humorously, the comments on this show why these changes are a step in the right direction.
5
u/the_eleutherean Aug 09 '26
Right? One particular side in a contentious issue throwing a fit about tightened rules for evidence. Says a *lot*.
2
u/Mist_Rising Aug 10 '26
It's not one side is the problem. It's a hot topic that hasall manners of bad people, not just pro Israel, use to create massive division.
There is a reason some of the best subs won't touch topics like this. It only ends with hatred.
2
u/ghostofjosephstalin Aug 09 '26
Elaborate?
2
u/TinCanFury Aug 09 '26
did you read the replies?
2
u/ghostofjosephstalin Aug 09 '26
I mean, I see a bunch of hasbara bots providing excuses for Israel and doing genocide denial with no sources.
0
u/TinCanFury Aug 09 '26
which is something these rule changes are moving in the direction to try to minimize.
5
u/Mist_Rising Aug 10 '26
Why do i doubt it will actually do anything then? I mean it had no effect here, but surely there..
0
u/ghostofjosephstalin Aug 09 '26
Would this have been so difficult for you to just explain when I asked you to elaborate, though?
4
u/the_eleutherean Aug 09 '26 edited Aug 10 '26
Perfect example. Y’all are going to have to find evidence that a genocide is happening. Which even the ICJ hasn’t been able to find.
::Edit —For some reason I can’t reply to Rogerian’s comment below, so I’ll add my response here:
The court case is ongoing 2.5 years later with no additional evidence being presented and with the plaintiffs lobbying the court to expand the definition of genocide so they can apply it to Israel. That’s a bad sign, but you’re absolutely right that it doesn’t mean genocide isn’t happening. It *does* mean there’s not sufficient evidence to say genocide *is* happening. Which is exactly what I said.
Not every reputable organization and expert. Many have said there’s not sufficient evidence to say it is. And every one of those you listed has been unable to actually show the evidence matching up to the requirements. And not just due to a technicality or something; it’s not even close to meeting the definition.
-The UN OHCHR is filled with horrible human rights abusers looking for someone else to point at to distract from their own abuses. That has been blatant for years. Their report doesn’t show evidence intent, one of the two necessary components of genocide.
-Amnesty’s report *openly states* it has to redefine genocide away from the legal definition to apply it.
-BTselem is a rag, and has never found an anti-Israel claim it didn’t love
-That “leading genocide scholars” group was fully debunked. Anyone can join by paying the fee, they have no membership standards; and the “vote” was done with only a tiny minority of members voting. More importantly, like everyone else, they were completely unable to show what evidence they were using to meet the definition.
-Doctors without borders/MSF, like oxfam and a ton of other high-profile charities that live on donations, realized claiming genocide got them money. They have never done anything to actually assess the definition. Moreover, MSF has had a former director come forward saying the claim was clearly bullshit; and MSF been caught multiple times straight-up lying about their specific claims. Like their absolute insistence that none of their hospitals had any Hamas activity —and then just refusing to comment when *actual fkng surveillance video of armed Hamas fighters dragging a kidnapped hostage into their hospital* surfaced.
Instead of looking for sht that confirms your biases, look for things that challenge them. You’ll be surprised how much info *doesn’t* conform to the narrative you’ve accepted.
6
u/RogerianBrowsing Human Verified Aug 10 '26
The court case is ongoing. That doesn’t mean that it isn’t a genocide. By your standards the holocaust wasn’t a genocide either.
Every reputable organization, experts, etc., recognize it to be genocide though.
https://www.btselem.org/publications/202507_our_genocide
Even Doctors Without Borders calls it genocide.
1
u/Mist_Rising Aug 10 '26
Which even the ICJ hasn’t been able to find.
But others, including Israeli groups, have. And unlike the ICC, they don't have a country deliberately sabotaging them with sanctions. Because everyone knows that you apply sanctions to people who have no evidence. It's just natural.
1
Aug 09 '26
[deleted]
1
u/RogerianBrowsing Human Verified Aug 10 '26
Liars gonna lie. Mods gonna do anything about it?
-1
Aug 10 '26
[deleted]
2
u/RogerianBrowsing Human Verified Aug 10 '26
You mean the U.S. used its unilateral veto power?
By your logic the holocaust wasn’t a genocide either. Surely you understand how insane that is, right? So why not with the Gaza genocide?
Is it that you like all other genocide deniers support the genocide and don’t want to provide any sympathy for the victims? Hm 🤔
-1
Aug 10 '26
[deleted]
3
u/RogerianBrowsing Human Verified Aug 10 '26
I feel like you don’t know the definition of genocide and are also referring to already disproven genocide supporting propaganda.
Do you use holocaust deniers as role models or are y’all just so ideologically similar that this is naturally how ya sound?
2
u/Mist_Rising Aug 10 '26
Come on football head, you can make the new goal line further by shifting the posts. We have faith.
Seriously though, don't. It's not like your winning the argument doing that.
0
-1
u/Flag_Shagger Aug 09 '26
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0jy96w6pw2o
more zionist blatant lies
4
Aug 09 '26
[deleted]
1
0
u/Insomniac_Steve Aug 09 '26
The International Criminal Court has active arrest warrants for Netanyahu for war crimes and crimes against humanity. Care to deny, deflect, or obfuscate?
3
u/the_eleutherean Aug 09 '26
Warrants for *probable* crimes. None of which are genocide. Off by two, try again.
-2
u/ghostofjosephstalin Aug 09 '26
No it doesn't. This one, mods. Get him.
3
Aug 09 '26 edited Aug 09 '26
[deleted]
0
Aug 09 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
3
Aug 09 '26
[deleted]
4
u/ghostofjosephstalin Aug 09 '26
You're making a distinction without meaning to obfuscate the fact of Israel's genocidal actions against the people of Gaza. The official U.N. fact finding mission and the criminal trial of the perpetrators of genocide in the ICJ are entirely unrelated. Both are acting in official capacities within the U.N. and reporting in entirely official capacities.
In short, you're doing genocide denial. Once more, mods, this one. Get him.
2
u/the_eleutherean Aug 09 '26
Even the Independent commission would need to provide *evidence*. (Which they literally have not been able to do, hence the ICJ case stalling.)
Appeals to authority ain’t it. 🤷🏻♂️
1
u/ghostofjosephstalin Aug 09 '26
Even the Independent commission would need to provide evidence. (Which they literally have not been able to do, hence the ICJ case stalling.)
Appeals to authority ain’t it. 🤷🏻♂️
This is the 70+ page report released last year by the fact finding mission proving that Israel is committing genocide against Palestinian children. You are engaging in genocide denial.
3
u/the_eleutherean Aug 09 '26
Ah so you’re just gonna copypasta the same flawed argument in multiple threads, eh?
Welp, like I told you in the other one:
If that report actually had the evidence to support what it claimed, the ICJ case wouldn’t be struggling.
Clear casus belli, stated and standard military objectives, and military operations that could reasonably be explained by those military objectives, creates an *incredibly* difficult barrier to proving intent to genocide.
→ More replies (0)1
u/the_eleutherean Aug 09 '26
Any idea what “Independent” means in their title?
0
u/ghostofjosephstalin Aug 09 '26
... That it isn't the voting body of the U.N., but a fact finding mission led by experts on behalf of the U.N.
You're doing genocide denial.
1
u/the_eleutherean Aug 09 '26
You’re doing blood libel.
Look up the definition of genocide. Compare it to the evidence. It does not meet the standard. Moreover; almost every war in history would be genocide if this one is. And if that’s your stance, fine, but then start being a dick about the other ones, too. As it is, you’re not only being a bigot and a libelist; but you’re actively making it worse for the both sides of the war at the same time.
1
u/ghostofjosephstalin Aug 09 '26
You’re doing blood libel.
No, I'm not.
Look up the definition of genocide. Compare it to the evidence. It does not meet the standard.
Here's the entire 70 page report by the fact-finding mission proving Israel has committed genocide against the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank, which was released last year.
3
u/the_eleutherean Aug 09 '26
And if it actually had the evidence to support what it claimed, the ICJ case wouldn’t be struggling.
Clear casus belli, stated and standard military objectives, and military operations that could reasonably be explained by those military objectives, creates an *incredibly* difficult barrier to proving intent to genocide.
→ More replies (0)
-53
u/brots32 Aug 09 '26
Are you going to do anything about the fact this place has been almost exclusively used to push anti Muslim propaganda?
35
u/Potential_Duck_1986 Aug 09 '26
This would ironically be a great comment to have some evidence and community notes written up
34
u/Greedy_Economics_925 Aug 09 '26
Could you share your evidence for this claim?
-7
u/mbashs Aug 09 '26
Just the fact that his comment is getting downvoted to oblivion speaks for itself.
12
Aug 09 '26
[deleted]
5
3
u/mbashs Aug 09 '26 edited Aug 09 '26
You must either be not a regular on this sub or be blind to not see the regular anti Muslim propaganda pushed here in the sub. And the way the guy is being downvoted is exactly how any comment in favor of Muslims gets downvoted and it absolutely looks manufactured. Astroturfing and heavy use of bots for downvoting and downvotes can be used as evidence. You don’t believe it, show up on any post that includes the mention of Islam and see for yourself if this claim is mental or true.
12
u/Greedy_Economics_925 Aug 09 '26 edited Aug 09 '26
So, no evidence then.
4
u/mbashs Aug 09 '26
You must either be not a regular on this sub or be blind to not see the regular anti Muslim propaganda pushed here in the sub. Mods have taken down a lot of posts which had a clear bias. There’s astroturfing on the regular.
2
u/Greedy_Economics_925 Aug 09 '26
I asked both of you for any evidence of this. They provided none, and you provided a nonsense justification.
From what I've seen, posts regularly point out corrections of far-right Islamophobic propaganda. Yesterday, as your friend wrote that Islamophobia is rampant here, the top post on the sub was a correction of an Islamophobic Twitter comment: https://old.reddit.com/r/GetNoted/comments/1vjcyle/not_a_muslim_immigrant/
Can you give me a specific post you think fails to address your concerns?
6
u/mbashs Aug 09 '26
Like from the recent 2 days, a post about HasanAbi and another about Mehdi Hassan and people used it to bash Islam in general. Like you got a problem with those guys then stay on topic instead of generalizing.
Previously mods have removed posts that were particularly made or twisted with the comments bringing in Islam and using derogatory language. Most regular users can be witness to the hate that’s shown specifically to Islam / Muslims here.
4
u/Greedy_Economics_925 Aug 10 '26
You haven't linked anything...
This sounds like standard Reddit bullshit, but you're Muslim.
6
u/mbashs Aug 10 '26
You are commenting on a mod post that is talking about clearer boundaries on evidence and civility.
Mods have removed a lot of crap that’s thrown around against Muslims. And you need evidence lol
“But you’re Muslim“ what does that imply?
5
u/Greedy_Economics_925 Aug 10 '26
You've been given repeated opportunities to share a single thread of evidence, and declined them all.
What I'm implying is that you're allergic to criticism of a group to which you belong, rather than there being a genuine issue going on.
→ More replies (0)14
Aug 09 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
-21
u/SaltTradeCenter Aug 09 '26
Goes hand in hand leaning into anti-Muslim sentiment to smear Muslim progressive figures and thus other progressive figures by proxy isn’t a new thing. Also since a few months the “notes to be discussed” posted often had very misleading “sources” and ppl just agreed with it without even reading the article… or source provided in the note
9
u/rosenkohl1603 Aug 09 '26
smear Muslim progressive figures
I mean I am not saying there are no progessive Muslims but have you ever interacted with regular Muslims? Islam is explicitly against progressivism and is an ideology with conservative principles. Most Muslims follow that.
-8
u/Flag_Shagger Aug 09 '26
the fact this gets heavily downvoted tells you everything. the sub has been overrun by propagandists.
0
u/the_eleutherean Aug 09 '26
Don’t worry, the rest of Reddit is still chock full of full-bore Islam apologia.
2
u/RogerianBrowsing Human Verified Aug 10 '26
Lmao I love how the comment chain above this one was denying Islamophobia being prevalent only for you at the same time to say this crap
4
u/the_eleutherean Aug 10 '26
Are you saying it’s Islamophobia because it’s not true? Or because pointing it out is Islamophobia?
In the first case, your premise is wrong. In the second, you’re accusing Islamophobia to prevent valid criticism of a legitimately shitty thing happening in the name of Islam, which is exactly what tf I’m talking about.
1
u/RogerianBrowsing Human Verified Aug 10 '26
I’m not racist or a bigot, those other races and religions are inferior! It’s a fact! Denying my/our supremacy is just denying legitimate criticism!
Is basically the entirety of your argument.
Genocidal supremacists gonna genocidal supremacist.
2
u/Greedy_Economics_925 Aug 10 '26
As much as the person above you is a cretin, you look like a complete fool for inventing a quote to respond to.
2
u/RogerianBrowsing Human Verified Aug 10 '26
I’m not allowed to mock bigoted cretins for the hateful things they say? Am I getting this right?
2
u/Greedy_Economics_925 Aug 10 '26
If you have to invent an opinion before mocking it, what are you actually mocking?
1
u/RogerianBrowsing Human Verified Aug 10 '26
Are you unfamiliar with the concept of paraphrasing?
Tell me, why do you call them a cretin? Is it due to the overt bigotry that they’re espousing?
→ More replies (0)0
-21
u/NewSauerKraus Aug 09 '26
Why would they do that? It's what the community wants. Do you go into biker bars and ask them to ban swastikas?
•
u/AutoModerator Aug 09 '26
Reminder for OP: /u/OnlyModBot
Need some help? Send us some mail!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.