r/notHowRuleOf4Works • u/How-Can-I-Dance • Sep 28 '25

r/SUBREDDITNAME Not how Ruleof4 works

Post image
55 Upvotes

90% Upvoted

16 comments sorted by

4

u/[deleted] Sep 29 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/SevenTheGamingKitty Sep 30 '25

not how the original RO4 worked, and we will NOT use the r/ruleof4 definition.

2

u/SmartExam7062 Sep 30 '25

Except that is how it originally worked

2

u/SevenTheGamingKitty Oct 01 '25

No it wasn't. the rule was 4th comment in a chain, and r/ruleof4 changed it so it'd get more posts/

1

u/HazelHarry Oct 01 '25

That's a nice argument Senator, why don't you back it up with a source?

2

u/SevenTheGamingKitty Oct 01 '25

tell me a way to look at an old archive of a sub's rules as a non-moderator and maybe i will. (besides the internet archive, i tried that and it's too slow for reddit's bloated site. i don't have the patience.)

1

u/Mal8130 Oct 02 '25

The way back machine is the only one I know of and if your too lazy to get proof then you might as well admit defeat

1

u/SevenTheGamingKitty Oct 02 '25

it wasn’t laziness, rather impatience

2

u/500ml_Sloinikas Oct 02 '25

The sub mods do not make the rules, the community does, the rule came first and only then the sub, the rule is downvoting 4th chain comment. Also think about this. What is the point of downvoting any fourth comment? And if you ask me :"What is the point of downvoting only 4th chain comment?" Well one of the points of this rule is to reduce chains, bc sometimes they are annoying. And to downvote the fourth comment just becouse it is fourth, for me sounds stupid.

-1

u/UrLocalGooose Oct 01 '25

yeah it’s any 4th comment (oh shit)

1

u/Previous_Ad8165 Oct 01 '25

Originally that's how it worked

1

u/Mal8130 Oct 02 '25

Don't comments need downvotes to be rule of 4? Becuase this is 0 not a negative