They've already stated that they're against "toxic" communities...
Which is an easy statement to make, but harder to when it comes to actually making the decisions. Are religious communities "toxic" because they can annoy atheists? Are atheist communities "toxic" because they can annoy religious folks?
Regardless, I'm willing to hang out here for a while and see how things progress.
Well there's a pretty clear difference between a tribes devoted to religion or atheism that annoy each other (for obvious reasons) and tribes devoted to hating a specific subset of people. It's not unintentionally annoying others that makes a tribe or a user toxic, it's about the purpose of the tribe or the motivation of the user. The purpose of /r/FPH was to demonize and hate a subset of people, and the motivation of its users was the same.
Which is an easy statement to make, but harder to when it comes to actually making the decisions. Are religious communities "toxic" because they can annoy atheists? Are atheist communities "toxic" because they can annoy religious folks?
Regardless, I'm willing to hang out here for a while and see how things progress.
Well there's a pretty clear difference between a tribes devoted to religion or atheism that annoy each other (for obvious reasons) and tribes devoted to hating a specific subset of people. It's not unintentionally annoying others that makes a tribe or a user toxic, it's about the purpose of the tribe or the motivation of the user. The purpose of /r/FPH was to demonize and hate a subset of people, and the motivation of its users was the same.
Yeah, that's the main concern. How to define toxicity. We will have to draw the lines as time passes.