The thread is a big referendum on just one user right now so I want to add myself to the group of people that are saying it’s about more than just the posting habits of one user—it’s several. Lots of users just embed YouTube videos in Senate threads with no commentary. Others make walls of text copy/pasted from somewhere with no commentary of their own. And, of course, there are the drive-by tweets. You also have the tv/movie/whatever media product kind of threads where people post the latest thing they’ve watched. I started one of those threads (the tv episode thread) and as the person who did that, I feel like it’s incumbent upon me to monitor the thread and make sure it doesn’t turn into rote listing with no personal touch of commentary or review. Every once in a while, I drop a reminder in there when it seems like some posters have forgotten or don’t know about the guideline I want to make sure the thread follows. We’ve been talking about what moderators can do about all this, what new rules can be written or old rules resurrected, but I think the starter of a thread has some agency, too. They have a responsibility by that thread to keep a steady guiding hand, so that the thread adheres to whatever level of discourse they have in mind. And if enough people don’t like the thread, the thread will simply die, or be replaced. What kind of expectations are placed on thread starters, especially of the big, official kind? This isn’t really talked about because we place so much of the burden on mods. Punk is the starter of the covid thread—what kind of limits do we allow him to lay down in the thread he started? How can the level of discourse be set at the beginning of the thread, or at such a point that it becomes “official,” so as to cut off at the pass problems like the kind detailed in this thread?