Let me be clear. This is not a rant about Reddit; or at least I do not care about one. Whatever problems I have with Reddit, I am convinced they will not get solved, and in my experience they are getting worse. So, there is no point ranting. Any complaint mentioned in this post has a single purpose: to describe what I am looking for, but more importantly, to describe what I am not looking for.

In short, I am looking for an online space in which authors can post their content so that the community, the author included, can engage with the content through a discussion. I care primarily about written, long-form content. At the same time, ere is what I do not care about at all:

a) Q&A
b) Posted content whose poster is not the author

You will probably say "this is what Reddit is for." Well, no. Please let me explain.

First of all, why not other platforms? What about Facebook, Twitter, Mastodon, etc.? These platforms do not endorse long-form content and discussion. You have to scroll past tens of posts before you can find any that is long-form, and then scroll past many of those to find anything that transcends frivolous topicality. So, as a reader it's unbelievably hard to find noteworthy content, and as an author your content does not reach the people you want.

So, why not Reddit instead? At first glance, Reddit is better, because your content does indeed reach more people. But there are several problems. First of all, I am not picky when it comes to topics. To me if it's good content (long-form, novel, coherent, etc.), it can be about anything. An example I like to give is that I could read any article by Michael Sandel no matter the topic. He could write about the Kardashians and I wouldn't care. But that is exactly against the philosophy of Reddit (I can't argue with that, it's a matter of opinion). So, if you are like me, you have to subscribe to like a thousand subreddits if you do not want to limit yourself by topic.

But here is the problem: most Reddit posts are either in category a) or b) mentioned earlier. Thus, Reddit has its own version of the problems Facebook, Twitter, etc. also have. Namely, I have to scroll through hundreds of posts to find something of worth. But in this case, the flooding is exacerbated because of the multiple subreddits; their streams meet up at my timeline to create a forceful torrent of garbage.

And then there are the moderators. It is hard to imagine more illiberal gatekeepers. So here is what happens. First, they come up with about five hundred rules. You may think this is turning into passive-aggressive griping, but please allow me to put it into perspective. I have submitted to a fair number of peer-reviewed conferences, but I also happen to know people from fields different from my own. Thus, while I submit to computer-science conferences, I also know what happens e.g., in philosophy journals. Thus, collectively, I have a fairly decent idea of what happens in the peer-review ecosystem. Now, I think we can all agree that the peer-review system is one of the most illiberal institutions, and in fact by design. It's a feature, not a bug. See, for example, Peer Review: A Critical Inquiry, Chapter 2. What is more, unlike Reddit, conferences and journals affect careers, tenures, promotions, recognition---which also means money; a lot of it.

Yet, I have never come across a peer review venue with as many rules as most subreddits I have subscribed to. We are not talking about 1 or 2 fewer rules. We are talking about a difference of 1 or 2 orders of magnitude. What is more, the rules in peer-review conferences are easy to follow. For example, I have never personally met anyone who has gotten desk-rejected; ever.

By contrast, on Reddit, moderators come up with a literally incomprehensible set of rules, and then if you disobey one of them rule, what happens? Do they tell you nicely "you missed rule X, you should know for next time"? No. They remove your post, they lock it, and they ban you. If we return to our comparison with peer review, we will see how preposterous this is. As you know, peer review is a priori. This means reviewers are asked to judge without knowing what the community at large thinks of a paper. And frankly, this is tough. On Reddit, however, moderators will do all of those things even if it is qualitatively, quantitatively, and a posteriori clear that the content benefits the community.

Lastly, I know for a fact that all this absurdity does not affect me only as an author, but also as a reader. Many novel, thoughtful posts have been censored, taken down, authors banned, comments deleted. What is left on my timeline is "here is how to pronounce 'banana'" posts.

So, I want to get away as fast as possible, but currently I feel stuck. Is there any alternative for authors and readers who love long-form, written content, and discussions?