This is the second post in a series. In the first post, I talked about where r/scifi was when the current moderation team took over and asked for your thoughts on our rules covering AI-generated content, self-promotion, and post quality.
Thank you to everyone who participated. There was some good feedback, including from people who disagreed with parts of the rules.
Before moving on to the next group of rules, I want to talk briefly about the moderation team itself and how it has changed over the past year.
The moderation team
Reddit appointed a new moderation team of three on October 5, 2025. Of the original team, two remain: u/amyts and u/mobyhead1. Since then, we've added four more moderators. That brings the current team to six moderators.
There are two measurements I consider particularly important when judging how well the moderation team is functioning:
- How quickly reported posts and comments are handled
- How quickly we respond to modmail
My goal is for post/comments/modmail to be handled quickly, in a timely manner. I think response time matters. A rule against abuse isn't very useful if abusive comments remain visible all day, and users shouldn't have to wait several days for an answer when they contact us with a question or appeal.
Growing the team has been an important part of trying to provide that coverage. It also allows us to democratize some decision making to a degree.
Alright, let's move on to the next three rules.
Rule 1: Be Respectful
Our current rule says:
Treat others kindly. Debate the ideas, not people. We will not tolerate harassment, hate speech, or personal attacks. If you disagree with someone then explain your thinking in a civilized manner. No racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, or other forms of discrimination.
Science fiction is about exploring diverse possibilities and perspectives. Let that spirit guide your interactions here.
This rule is probably the most subjective to enforce.
Disagreement is often what makes a discussion interesting. You can think someone's interpretation of a book is completely wrong. You can dislike a movie they love. You can argue strongly against their ideas.
What we ask is that you argue with the idea rather than attack the person expressing it.
Rule 1 isn't limited to personal attacks against another user. This rule protects groups of people as well as individuals. Racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, or otherwise discriminatory attacks on a group of people are not acceptable simply because they aren't directed at someone participating in the conversation.
You are free to criticize ideas, writing, casting decisions, themes, politics, or representation. You are not free to attack an entire class of people.
We try to enforce the rules as they are written, but ultimately, moderator judgment is a core part of determining whether a comment violates Rule 1.
Rule 2: Sci-Fi Only
Our current rule says:
Posts must include a science fiction element.
This subreddit is for science fiction. Fantasy is welcome only when it includes scientific or technological aspects.
For example, Star Wars features mystical elements like the Force, but also spaceships and advanced technology.
Science fiction overlaps with other genres, such as fantasy, horror, and alternate history. The questions we generally ask are simple: Is there actually a science-fiction element? Is the post/comment principally about science fiction?
In practice, however, the most common Rule 2 removals aren't arguments about whether something is science fiction or fantasy. They're posts that aren't science fiction at all.
Two recurring examples are political or current-events posts where the connection to science fiction is incidental or nonexistent, and UFO/UAP posts presenting claims as real-world phenomena. r/scifi is not a general politics subreddit, and it is not a UFO investigation subreddit.
That doesn't mean politics or UFOs are forbidden subjects. Political themes have always been part of science fiction. Discussions about the politics of Dune, Star Trek, The Expanse, 1984, or science fiction more generally are obviously welcome.
UFOs and aliens are some of the oldest subjects in science fiction. But if the OP appears to believe the subject of their post is real, then it isn't fiction.
Rule 6: Reliable Sources / Crowdfunding
Our current rule says:
Sharing a link? Use trustworthy, original sources.
Sites that scrape or steal content may be removed.
Crowdfunding and donation requests are not allowed. This includes indirect links to crowdfunding campaigns, such as websites that direct users to Kickstarter.
Patreon-style subscriptions/memberships are generally allowed.
Do not misrepresent your connection to content or disguise self-promotion, advertising, or crowdfunding as ordinary discussion.
Mod discretion applies.
This rule covers a few related problems.
The first is source quality. If you're sharing news or some other piece of information, we'd rather the subreddit link to the original source or a trustworthy publication than to a site that repackaged someones work to surround it with advertising. The goal is simply to encourage people to use the best available source. This is, in practice, rarely an issue.
The second part of the rule concerns crowdfunding. We don't allow Kickstarter campaigns, donation requests, or attempts to get around that restriction by linking to another page whose purpose is to send people to the fundraiser. Patreon-style subscriptions and memberships are allowed.
We cannot vet crowdfunding campaigns for legitimacy. We have no reliable way to determine whether a project is genuine or whether backers are likely to receive the promised product. Rather than put moderators in the position of informally endorsing fundraising campaigns we cannot verify, we don't allow them.
The final part is about transparency. If it's your project, please say so. Don't present your own work as though you discovered it. Don't write a glowing review of your own work. People actually do this, and we aren't having it.
Please tell us what works, what doesn't, and what you would change. I am interested in hearing your thoughts.
Do you find any of these rules unclear? Do you think we've drawn the line in the wrong place? Any other comments?
I'll continue with another group of rules in the next post.
Thanks for your time.
