system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
[Subreddit Business: RULE ENFORCEMENT CHANGE, PLEASE READ] A Reminder about the Distinction Between Watsonian and Doylist Comments

TL; DR: Doylist answers will soon merit an automatic temp ban, with escalating penalties for further offenses.

Long Version: One of the core tenets that underpins this subreddit is that we're here to talk about the internal logic of works and franchises, the nuts and bolts of what's happening within the setting, not what's going on outside. The internet is full of places where you can talk about how many times George Lucas watched The Dam Busters before making Episode IV, mention that Harrison Ford had a wicked case of the trots when they were trying to film the fight against the swordsman in Raiders of the Lost Ark, or say ", lol", but we're not here to do that. We're here to talk about why the Rebels chose to fly down that trench and why Indy chose to draw and fire his revolver on the sword guy, not what inspired Lucas or what Ford ate on set.

The distinction between "watsonian" and "doylist" comments is hard coded into the rules of the subreddit by design, not by mistake. Placing that distinction allows us to maintain a level of focus, and provide constructive answers. Sometimes this means leaving out interesting notes or educational facts, but 9 times out of 10 when we delete a doylist comment, it's nothing useful or enlightening; "" or "George Lucas sucks" doesn't help anyone.

We've noticed an uptick in the quantity of doylist comments. Not the quality, by any means, just the volume. Either we have a lot of new people wandering in without reading the rules, or older users who have forgotten. This goes against both the rules and the spirit of the subreddit, and does not represent sincere attempts to address the questions at hand. Steps must be taken to bring this under control.

**EFFECTIVE 8 AM EASTERN STANDARD TIME ON MONDAY, MARCH 7, 2022, DOYLIST RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS WILL MERIT A 3 DAY TEMP BAN. ADDITIONAL OFFENSES WILL MERIT ESCALATING PENALTIES, UP TO AND INCLUDING PERMANENT BAN FROM THE SUBREDDIT**

A reminder in case anyone needs it:

Watsonian pertains to the internal logic, history and mechanics of the setting.

Doylist pertains entirely to the external concerns, habits, limitations and demands of and on the creators.

Edge Cases:

Comments or statements made by creators are permitted if they concern the internal logic or lore of the setting. "Word of god" is not the be all and end all of sources (when in doubt the published material wins), but it is a valid source. If the creator starts hemming and hawing about budget limitations or recycling props, that's doylist and should be left out.

Settings with strong "meta" elements can blur the lines between watsonian and doylist. When a Mel Brooks character punches out the on-camera film director or kills a key grip with their Schwartz, a Scream victim notes the tropes behind traditional slasher films, or Mister Fantastic calls out that the fundamental elements of the Marvel universe are stories, it's not doylist to point this out.

**EDIT 5 MARCH 2022**

Thanks to everyone who has responded to this post with questions and feedback. Based on those questions, here's some more information and clarification.

GENERAL QUESTIONS: Per our last rule adjustment, overly broad "general" questions are being actively discouraged, especially ones where the answer is critically dependent on the setting. Responding to a general question with a response that points out that the answer is going to vary from setting to setting is **not** doylist, but it should be more than just saying "it depends". General questions will continue to be screened out, and overly general questions should be reported for review.

INTRINSICALLY DOYLIST QUESTIONS: We do get questions on here that cannot be addressed in a watsonian fashion. These questions themselves are against the rules, and will be removed as they are found. If you see such a question **don't give the doylist response**. 

If you can't think of a watsonian answer, don't respond. No answer is better than a doylist answer.

If you honestly believe there isn't a watsonian answer possible, downvote the question and move on.

If the question is egregiously doylist in nature (things like obvious production errors, the fetishes/religions/drug habits of the writer, corporate shenanigans, etc), downvote, report, and move on. 

REALITY: Per the rules, we're not here to discuss the real world, and questions that ask things like how a fictional concept/technology would work in reality, if a fictional thing is plausible, or about things that happened in real life. When answering a question it's ok to use real life examples for comparison and illustration, so long as it doesn't discuss author influences/motives, technology available to production crews, etc., nor does it get too close to modern events (20 years is given as a yardstick). For instance, if someone asks a question about the aluminum Christmas tree Lucy mentions in A Charlie Brown Christmas, it's fair to bring up the historical practice of using an aluminum tree as a Christmas decoration in the United States, but it's not fair game to mention anything about Charles Schultz's opinions on said trees, whether or not he himself had one, and so on.

Edit 7 March 2022, 8:00 AM EST: *VERY LOUD PURGE SIREN SOUNDS OUT OVER THE LAND*
gpt
Occasionally a question comes up about a setting or franchise with conflicting sources or multiple canons. Is it acceptable to acknowledge these facts while giving a Watsonian answer? ie. "In some sources the answer is X, but in other sources the answer is Y"?