⇐ back to main wiki page


Your moderators don't want to micromanage, and we believe the reporting/voting system is sufficient for keeping our discussions mostly consistent with the rules listed in the sidebar and discussed on the rules page of this wiki. But there will be cases where we have to step in, so the goal of this document is to provide a degree of transparency by outlining what we feel we must do to maintain order and enforce those rules.

Removing Posts

A post may be removed by a moderator if it seems to egregiously violate one or more of our guidelines. For example:

  • The post doesn't include "CMV" in the title.

  • The body of the post lacks a basic degree of supporting detail concerning the view under discussion. Use your words, please.

  • The original poster makes it clear that they are not sufficiently interested in or willing to change their view, even under the broad definition of "Changing Your View" from the side bar.

  • It was posted from an account with a karma score that cannot be explained by the history. I.E.: a user that appears to delete all of their posts shortly after making them. We added this policy after our users complained about posts that get deleted by the OP after people have put a lot of time and effort into composing a response.

  • It smells wrong.

A mod may (and may not, depending on the severity of the violation) post a good-faith comment to the OP inviting them to correct their error before the post is deleted.

"It smells wrong"? What the hell does that even mean?


What's the harm (particularly at a place like CMV, designed for rational discussion of controversial topics) in rationally talking about a claim, even if that claim is utterly wacky/offensive/ignorant/hurtful?


  1. It wastes time that could otherwise be spent commenting on legitimate posts. Deltas aside, I'd much rather talk to an OP that is responsive and might be willing to change their mind. The obvious solution is to ignore these threads, but some people just can't help themselves.

  2. They take up space in the subreddit and crowd out legitimate threads. This makes the subreddit as a whole look crazier at a casual glance, and also can lead to exhaustion where people get sick of wading through nonsense threads to find the good ones and just unsubscribe.


That helps me see that the harm comes to the venue for discussion and to the community at large, not the person(s) victimized by the hurtful claim. Black people aren't (I suspect) especially hurt to learn that there are racists in the world, but those of us who want to have real conversations (about racism or anything else) all suffer by permitting the extreme nonsense. What shall we do about it? Where's the line and how do we draw it?


I think we have to go by an old supreme court ruling on pornography: "I know it when I see it." It's impossible to have a hard-and-fast rule about these things. But if a thread looks like it might be nonsense, OP replies a couple of times in a way that suggests they aren't changing their view any time soon, and users agree that it's BS and report the thread, we are probably safe in removing it. If we start getting complaints that "I think CMV is too boring now that controversial topics keep getting deleted, CMV" we can revisit it.

So. If two mods suspect that OP is violating the CMV Etiquette, and if they also agree that the thread itself will not benefit our community, then it may be deleted.

Removing/Reporting Comments


  • The comment is a direct response to an OP and simply agrees. There are enough echo chambers on the internet for such stuff and we don't plan to be one of them. On the other hand, something like "I mostly agree, but..." is perfectly permissible. Rule 1 is the basis for most of the comment removals at CMV.

  • The comment is just a link to an image or article, and the text of the comment doesn't stand on its own. Use your words, please. Including links as part of your response is fine if it supports your point, but a link by itself is unhelpful and unwelcome. So is a wall of copypasta.

  • The comment is hostile or disrespectful, even if the comment includes arguments that would otherwise be valid. Actual examples: "I believe you are dumb. CMV." "Man up faggot." "Dude, you really fucking ignorant, try not to procreate." It doesn't take many comments like this to result in a ban, and in fact just one is probably sufficient. See "Banning Users" below.

We encourage the community to use the report button to call mods' attention to rule-violating comments. When reviewing these reports, a range of possibilities emerge:

  • The mod may delete the comment. The mod may (or may not) reply to the comment (like this) with a brief reason for the deletion.

  • The mod may ignore the report, approving the comment. The mod may (or may not) reply to the comment indicating that the comment received a report that was not acted on.

Notwithstanding the discretion afforded to our moderators, if you message us about one of our decisions, you will get a response.


Comment and post removals constitute warnings, i.e., three removals constitute three warnings. After the third warning, the mods have a general rule of giving the user a three-day ban. We consider this a hard warning that we are serious about enforcing our rules and expect users to follow them. Users who receive a three-day ban and continue to break the rules will be banned (see: "Banning Users" below.)

We may also send warnings in the form of a message. For example, two comment removals and one direct message by the mod team would constitute three warnings in total.

Moderators keep note of these removals and messages with links to the original rule-breaking comments and posts.

Banning Users

A user will be banned from /r/changemyview if the mods conclude from the user's post(s) that the user is deliberately antagonizing, particularly disruptive to the orderly conduct of respectful discourse, or apparently uninterested in participating in open discussion. It's hard to define exactly what will lead the mods to this conclusion about any given user, but like you we know it when we see it. We are also mindful (as we would like you to be), that "when you argue with a troll, you are entering a competition to see who has more free time. You will lose, because you have a life and the troll does not. Do not EVER respond to trolls. Instead, report them!" (We think this great observation came from the mods over at /r/gonewild [nsfw]). What this means to us is that when we see a pattern of egregious and wanton violations to our community guidelines, we won't spend a lot of time wringing our hands over it; we'll just ban the offender(s) and move on.

Additionally, mods will generally be less forgiving of violations of the rules (particularly comment rules 2 and 3) when it is clear that a user came to /r/changemyview because they were interested in a particular topic of discussion, rather than the community's unique method of discussion.

A moderator may (and may not, at moderators' exclusive discretion) make an effort to make contact with a ban candidate in order to clarify our guidelines and provide an opportunity to adhere to them. If no response is received, if the response is not persuasive, or if the offending behavior continues after this effort, the ban will proceed with no further warning.

Example warning:

Banned Message

We maintain a list of banned users, which includes a brief rationale for each ban.


The CMV mod team's goal is to run this subreddit as transparently, as fairly, and as openly possible. Your feedback on these standards (and individual applications of these standards) is always welcome. Please use one of our occasional mod threads for discussion or contact the mods directly.

revision by Snorrrlax2∆— view source